1866 IHC Major Rev Die Errors Cud/Crack?

[searching4errors]

Hi again everyone... I have been excitedly awaiting when I would be able to post pics of my 1866 IHC found on eBay. It does have issues as you can see,such as porosity and many rim errosion areas, but still has lots of good detail. The edge of the coin, especially where the cracks run, is hollowed out in areas. Can't tell if it's as a result of die issues or later damage. Possibly a little of each, possibly a lot of or one or the other. The Reverse of the coin is where it gets sweet. There is a very large, almost elongated hour glass shaped, die crack/cud in the right side Wreath that extend into a Y at the top. The outer left side of the wing on the Y runs up the Wreath while right wing of the Y run up and out onto the rim. The base of the hour glass crack/cud also runs onto the rim. You may not be able to see the small cracks which runs onto the rim at about 7 O'Clock next to the arrow feathers and about 9 O'Clock across from the bottom of the "ONE" (in the ONE CENT) onto the rim. Again, I'd love to hear comments from the forum as to identifying this error and maybe an approximate value. Thanks again and have a super weekend.
Fran

[diamond]

It appears you have an arcing, rim-to-rim die crack. I don't see the vertical displacement or lateral offset which would indicate the presence of a retained cud.

[searching4errors]

Thanks Mike! I really appreciate the information you've posted. Would you by chance have a picture of such a coin with the vertical displacement or lateral offset that you can post? I think it would help me understand the term better to visually see it. Thanks again!

It appears you have an arcing, rim-to-rim die crack. I don't see the vertical displacement or lateral offset which would indicate the presence of a retained cud.

[diamond]

Here ya go.

1966_ret_rev.jpg

This shows a retained cud on the reverse face with dramatic vertical displacement.

[searching4errors]

Thank you so much for the reply and pic. Do you think that my coin would have much value over the same grade coin without the error? What actually determines which errors are more collectible than others? Maybe one day I will find a gem of a coin. I hope so.

Another question on errors... would a mintmark on LMCs before the 90s be considered a RPM if the mark is extremly thick or does it have to show signs of another mint mark underneath? I've also noticed that once in a while on some coins I check, the mintmarks seem to be undersized (razor thin and smaller) mintmarks while others seem a bit larger than normal? Does this maybe have anything to do with the year, the mint, and whether it is a penny, nickel, dime, quarter, etc. coin? I've seen some mint marks so small that they are a bit hard to see with the naked eye. Thanks again for your time and expertise.
Fran

[wavysteps]

Earlier dies were polished quite often to forestall the affects of die aging, however, in doing so some of the greatest error coins were produced. The 1922 Lincoln cent without the D and the three and also three and a half legged buffalo nickel.

When a design element begins to thin, it is mostly caused by the die being abraded, either to remove a mark on the die face (such as a die clash or die gouge) or as I mentioned above to sharpen the details on a worn die.

This is more than likely what you are seeing on your examples.

BJ Neff

[diamond]

Thank you so much for the reply and pic. Do you think that my coin would have much value over the same grade coin without the error? What actually determines which errors are more collectible than others?
Fran

Given the coin's horrid condition, I doubt the presence of the die crack would enhance its current negligible value.

It's hard even for me to figure out why some errors are popular and some aren't.

[searching4errors]

Thank you both, B.J. and Mike, for your replies. Again... much appreciated.
Fran