2002-P quarter Indiana error

[Hinkle]

Hello there again, would this error be called a die chip around the star area. Not sure if it's anything else but a die chip. Any help would be great thanks. PXL_20250103_180750421.jpg PXL_20250104_004323716.jpg PXL_20250104_004249210.jpg PXL_20250104_004355689.jpg

[MintErrors]

In my opinion, I do not know if that's a die chips or simply a few fragments that landed on the coin, the star close to the issue looks like it's showing copper on the side. Machine damage could have played a part in this as the coin was being struck.

The other issue here is, those areas are super small.
You will have Ito determine if there are any cracks around these dots.
With a circulated coin its difficult to know for sure from a few photos.
Heck, it could even be a small spark shower from a welder.

[Hinkle]

Thank you, I just know statehood quarters are known for die chips. Die chips and lamination are prone to me, Everytime im searching rolls of coins. Hope something different pops up.

[MintErrors]

In my opinion, the collecting world is something you can mold around yourself. You can choose or alter the way you go about collecting. You can roll search, hunt bargains at flea markets, pawn shops, online web sites or coin shows. You can collect circulated coins, proofs or uncirculated coins. It depends on your choices, desires, budget and time. During these times, one also has to take into account the authenticity of the item, and whether the collectable is genuine and unaltered.

Back in 2002 or so, the United States Mint implemented strict quality assurance and controls. Since then, the major mint errors that used to escape the mint have been drastically reduced.

One also has to realize that only certain errors and issues will fit into a standard size coin wrapper. Anything too far out of tolerance has a habit to bust the rolls during production, and the culprit usually is discarded, held off to the side or sold to someone before it had a chance to become part of the thrill of the hunt.

People are warming up to the new fangled cheaper microscopes with great magnification. In times past, the magnification and general rule of 10x magnification was designed to keep the masses back then from getting too picky in finding things too minor. Now a days, I see way too many over magnified finds in the 100 to 2000x range that are just too far. Creating Coins is not a perfect science. As Bob used to say here, it's the Mint, things happen. These machines can operate at speeds faster than a caffinated jack hammer. The slightest deviation from the process may create some undesired affects.

So no matter the path chosen in a collectable field, it's typically drama and condition that can determine the collectibility and demand.

Happy hunting.

[Hinkle]

Thank you minterrors, nice advice. I've been told a year or two back keep it at 10x when looking for errors or variety. Which was told to me I'm looking at coins way to hard, meaning anything over 10x loupe or scope is since less.