major clashed die coin?

[rascal]

Here's some photos of one of my latest coins . I'm adding them here for you folks that may have never seen the coin. I have it on the CT forum and some of you may have not seen it. it is supposed to be a major die clash coin but it may need further study. all opinions are welcome as long as you keep them on the coin and not me. Troy

[diamond]

It's an obvious squeeze job. The incuse design elements cross Lincoln's face, which is not possible considering how high the relief is in this area. You'll also note that some of the incuse elements invade the design rim, which is also not possible in a clash. All other sources of incuse, mirror-image design elements (e.g., brockage, flipped over dropped filling) are also inadmissable. ICG got it hysterically wrong. This will be my only comment on this vandalized coin.

-- Mike Diamond

[rascal]

It's an obvious squeeze job. The incuse design elements cross Lincoln's face, which is not possible considering how high the relief is in this area. You'll also note that some of the incuse elements invade the design rim, which is also not possible in a clash. All other sources of incuse, mirror-image design elements (e.g., brockage, flipped over dropped filling) are also inadmissable. ICG got it hysterically wrong. This will be my only comment on this vandalized coin.

-- Mike Diamond

Mike I don't mean any offense towards you but I have to disagree with you. First off there is such a thing as warped or bulging dies or whatever that can become clashed .... the incuse elements don't invade the design rim. I thought they did when I first looked at the coin but the incuse letters touches the inside bottom of the rim and ends right there. another thing to look at is how the outline of the building stops so adruptly.if this was a hammer job the outline of the building would have kept going until it got more shallow and ended at the surface of the coin.

second thing I am thinking about is this may possibly be a dropped die filling from the remains of a almost totally worn out die cap. If you will notice in one of the photos a piece of a dropped letter is easily visible on Lincoln's head. so this may tell us something was going on. also look at how the incuse letters ends at the coins rim without pushing the fragile rim out of place or putting damage to the rim.

third thing is looking for evidence of a hammer/squeeze job. there is absolutely none to report. It would be totally impossible IMO to sink this many extra letters up tight against the extremely fragile coins rim without even putting a scratch on the rim at all. also the way the sunken in design elements of the memorial building ends so adruptly should tell us that it is not a squeeze job.

I don't know which expert examined this coin for ICG but they had to have been very knowlegable about error coins and I applaud them and I'm saying I'm sorry for not believing their decision when I saw a photo of the coin on Ebay.I hope this learns me a lesson to stop trying to identify coins from photos whether this coin turns out to be good or bad.

Mike if it turns out that you have made a bad call don't feel bad at yourself because we are only human and all of us have made plenty of bad calls . we will make plenty more bad calls in the future as long as we keep on dealing with error or variety coins. Troy

[JonPSullivan]

I have to say I agree with Mike and I'm 99.9% sure it's a fake (squeeze job.)

Jon

[rascal]

I have to say I agree with Mike and I'm 99.9% sure it's a fake (squeeze job.)

Jon

here's a photo someone made of a coin they did a squeeze/hammer job on trying to convince me my coin was one also. I'll add a photo of my coin with it so you can see the differences. IMO it would be totally impossible to do this without putting some extra damage on a coin somewhere.

I have experiment with the hammer job coins for years so I could recognise them from the real errors. at the best anyone could do these would still show some damage somewhere and be squashed out larger in diameter. notice on the altered coin how the outline of the top part of the building keeps on going until it runs out to nothing at the surface then notice how the rim is damaged , on my coin this line ends adruptly under the coins surface plus part of another letter is on Lincoln's head.

I would love for someone to try to put this many letters this deep and tight up against the rim and not put a scratch on the coin and not squash it out of shape. IMO it's impossible to do unless a expert counterfeiter could do it.anyway we are just discussing the coin and our opinions on the forum are worthless when it comes to authenticating a coin. the coin with the black background is the altered coin.

[rockdude]

Which coin is yours?

[rascal]

Which coin is yours?

This question makes no sense at all ?

[rockdude]

Quote; here's a photo someone made of a coin they did a squeeze/hammer job on trying to convince me my coin was one also. I'll add a photo of my coin with it so you can see the differences.

Which coin is yours?
I hope this helps.

[rascal]

Quote; here's a photo someone made of a coin they did a squeeze/hammer job on trying to convince me my coin was one also. I'll add a photo of my coin with it so you can see the differences.

Which coin is yours?
I hope this helps.

Your answer was already there , read post #5

[rockdude]

that was a fun game..

[cents1st]

Diamond is correct. There is no way this was struck at the Mint. Clashed dies do not manufacture this type of coin. It is spurious.

[rascal]

Diamond is correct. There is no way this was struck at the Mint. Clashed dies do not manufacture this type of coin. It is spurious.

This coin may end up proving that you and everyone else that said it was not struck at the mint dead wrong and I guarantee it. go back and read my post #3 and read it slowly and maybe you can understand why I'm so sure it is a mint struck coin. also this coin has a high rim with a thin almost razor sharp top edge and there is no damage that is associated with a hammer job to the top of the rim or anwhere else on this coin. look at how fuzzy the incuse details looks on the ICG coin and on a hammer job coin they are always perfectly smooth and sharp looking.

I sent this coin to a long time die variety expert that don't attribute this type error coin and as a friend he made a exception and agreed to look at it for me just to see if he thought it was a mint error or not. some think they know it all and know nothing emailed him or called him and told him a flat out lie and said I was using this coin to just cause a rukus on the coin forums and told my friend it was only a hammer job. this got him really teed off at me because he believed the know it all know nothing was telling him the truth. notice I'm not mentioning any names but the one that did this knows who they are.

I have collected error and variety coins probably as long or longer than anyone still alive and I say this coin is a real mint error and my old time friend even though someone made him mad at me says he sees no reason to say ICG got it wrong. there is a big difference between a mint struck coin and a hammer / squeeze job. like I said go back and read post #3 Troy

[rascal]

Diamond is correct. There is no way this was struck at the Mint. Clashed dies do not manufacture this type of coin. It is spurious.

Could you please explain to us why you think clashed dies do not manufacture this type of coin ? this is exactly what a major clashed die coin looks like.

[19Lyds]

I have collected error and variety coins probably as long or longer than anyone still alive and I say this coin is a real mint error and my old time friend even though someone made him mad at me says he sees no reason to say ICG got it wrong. there is a big difference between a mint struck coin and a hammer / squeeze job. like I said go back and read post #3 Troy

Until the coin is examined by a CONECA representative and validated as what you claim it to be, it will always be considered a squeeze job. ICG is just not well enough established in the attribution and identification of error coins for the error collecting community to accept their word for it.

[rockdude]

Until the coin is examined by a CONECA representative and validated as what you claim it to be, it will always be considered a squeeze job. ICG is just not well enough established in the attribution and identification of error coins for the error collecting community to accept their word for it.

So let it be written, so let it be done.