1889 P Vam-52 Morgan $ w/ obvs dime planchet sized & shaped marks

[Ken-Pollock]

(edit: i did not want to put my post in this section...but, at least there are pics in this post and so i guess this edited version is ok for now...i will now post this where it should have been posted) link to the new thread/discussion thread for this coin (better info & details) if anyone is interested: http://board.conecaonline.org/showthread.php?t=3925

my coin 1889 P Vam-52








superimposed merc dime over morgan $ showing where the lines/marks should be...fits quite well doesn't it?

[diamond]

It appears to be pre-strike damage of some sort. Narrow incuse lines present on a planchet are sometimes not completely erased by the strike.

[Ken-Pollock]

so i'm at the right place then ... and it's perhaps possible or likely that CONECA would certify/could certify this coin as a genuine minting error...and state the most likely source for the error perhaps? if so, and since i am new here/new to CONECA (not a member yet), can someone provide the best link for becoming a member and the best link for the cost/s for certification/slabbing and such (again, if it makes it as an error coin...but at least the cost for the process for me to see if it can make it)?

[diamond]

There's no way to determine the cause of the curved groove. CONECA has no certification service. All it provides are verbal/written diagnoses and descriptions for mint errors. CONECA's website is www.conecaonline.org. You can sign up there. -- Mike Diamond

[Ken-Pollock]

There's no way to determine the cause of the curved groove.

how about what most likely caused it (what other possibilities are there than what i write about and describe below? i think this "dime" shaped & sized feature is very important and should be acknowledged. that's what i'm seeing. thoughts? i'll send it/the coin to you for viewing if needed...if you are interested and the details can be worked out. experts have had trouble placing this coin in their knowledge base already.


Mike have you studied where the marks on my coin intersect important details on the Morgan obverse design and compared them to the superimposed mercury dime/morgan $ photo below my coin's pictures?

here is what i see (from a post i just made in the discussion thread for this coin) :: "still, i wish folks would acknowledge the shape of the prior-to-minting planchet mark as being that of a "dime" [(in essence...most likely a dime planchet incomplete punch mark of a dime or some such similar thing. i cannot conceive of how it can be anything else. a "man-made"/unnatural dime shaped arc/mark can only be produced from a dime outlined/scribed or a dime producing device/machine/thing imso)"

"study the superimposed image in my first post and compare it to where the mark/s on my coin hits/intersects important details: like across the face/and under the eye, into the hair, the tip of the leaf, the right-side top of the Y, the wheat blade and so on...there is also an angled mark on this coin at the edge/rim between the R & I just where it should be...as well as a barely visible extension of the line before the nose in the field...again, all conforming to the shape of a dime/more so i think a dime planchet outline...which would be a little narrower diameter-wise i believe. ] " ...i have placed a modern dime over my coin encapsulated several times...and it is essentially a perfect fit, especially across the face (a modern dime is a little wider than a dime planchet i believe because of the forced reeded edging produced during minting...and there is also the height of the Morgan details to consider...they slightly alter things as well it seems...slightly. somehow the secondary and tiertiary inner marks were produced...and those i think are much more speculative but not nearly as important as the main line.

[Ken-Pollock]

here are some better pictures that show the dime shaped & sized mark much better

i continue to discuss this coin at vamworld as well here: http://www.vamworld.com/share/view/62804198 ...as i say, i'd like the shape of the mark to be noted on this coin when it is certified & graded...ie. that it is dime-like in shape and size. thoughts? comments? the first picture is of a mark on the edge which may be an extension of the main mark. the modern dime is resting on my coin's protective cover.

[Ken-Pollock]

i've posted at least 10 more pictures...

on this thread of mine today: http://www.vamworld.com/share/view/62804198

[diamond]

You're grasping at straws. As I said earlier, there's no way to get any more precise than identifying this as pre-strike damage.

[Ken-Pollock]

- thank you Mike for the reply...and thank you for helping to get others to see and accept this coin's "semi-circular" marks as pre-strike damage. that was very helpful. -

still, this designation really is not very specific...but i accept it as the proper place & descriptive area for this coin. that being said, these marks i talk about (to my mind at least or only) seem most likely to have come from perhaps at least 2 attempted or mistaken dime planchet cuts/punches into the morgan planchet...and perhaps this occrred at a noticeably less than 90 degree strike/punch angle.

the thickenss of (1889 and contemporary) dimes is around 1mm +/- and the thickness of a morgan $ is roughly 3mms. to my mind and eyes 2 dime planchet cuts occurred on this morgan planchet. they may have been slightly angled and since they appear to be the result of a dime planchet cutting device/set-up/part somehow, they did not go very deeply into the much thicker morgan planchet (penetrating only 1/2 of a millimeter perhaps)...and thus, the results and evidence on this coin: 2 dime planchet incomplete cut/punch marks on only one side of this coin (however this actually occurred and/or why will remain unknown) that do not look like the more common incomplete punch marks on all the dozen or so coins like this that i've seen (these all had the same size punch mark as pre-strike damaged remaining planchet). incomplete punch marks that because they lacked deep penetration do not form complete circles nor an easily visible arc to the rim & edge of a coin.

if you have seen other examples like this coin, please let me know. for now, i think my conception and explanation of these marks is rather good based on the evidence on the coin and some knowledge of the minting process. to my mind, these marks most likely occurred in some fashion along the lines i have described. i am able to line-up ~ 40 degrees of the arced edge (40 degrees of the circle) of a modern dime with the single circular mark section across the facial area-nose area of the morgan very well. to my mind and eyes that strongly supports my theory.

what i am trying to do is make sense out of what i am seeing. if there were other examples like this coin around with a reasonable explanation for the pre-strike marks i wouldn't have been mulling this coin for the past 16 or so months. i find the marks to be interesting. of course, i suspect all here like error coins as well.

[Ken-Pollock]

You're grasping at straws. As I said earlier, there's no way to get any more precise than identifying this as pre-strike damage.

i now believe i know what these marks are. i figured this out last Summer and posted about it on my Vamworld thread: http://www.vamworld.com/share/view/62804198 ...this is after i found & bought an 1839 O/O Liberty Seated dime (with dime sized re-rolled incomplete punch marks on obvs & reverse sides) and an 1845 O L.S. dime with a quarter size re-rolled incomplete punch mark on the reverse only. i have seen other coins on the Net that are also similar to my 3 coins. some links are at my Vamworlds link above for these coins and/or are now provided below. i plan on taking pics of my 1845 O dime and posting them later today, hopefully.

i found a PCGS coin from an earlier Heritage auction that i linked to that was labelled a mint error incomplete punch plan. it resembles my Morgan's mark in fineness and it appears to be on the obvs only, but i think it's a Morgan $ size re-rolled incomplete punch mark. here's the link to that thread: Incomplete Punch 1883-O from a Heritage Auction January 2009 http://www.vamworld.com/share/view/81802261

--- and now the other stuff/data, pics, vids, links and my thoughts that support my re-rolled incomplete punch theory ---


"" Ken-Pollock Jun 8, 2017
here's what i think now about these two coins of mine: i think it is quite easy to make a very good case that the 1839 o/o dime's coin stock strip was re-rolled after having incomplete punch/blanking marks put on it...then it went through the coining/minting process and these 2 "dime sized"/dime blank size marks are what we see now. the 1889 v-52 Morgan is an odd ball...but it's obverse side, with the dime blank size punch mark...that was also re-rolled on a Morgan dollar thickness coin stock strip...has only the one remaining blank cutter mark on it. this mark does fit all the criteria for my re-rolled blank punch mark theory. it only differs from my 1839 dime and the penny i linked to above (a few days ago) in that the cut/punch mark is only on one side and that these marks are from a different size cutter/punch than the final coin. i suppose this different sized punch mark is related to there only being marks on one side. how this dime sized blank cut mark got there will remain unknown. but, the mark that remains fits my re-rolled blank punch theory. i think this theory is valid...thoroughly considering the coining/minting process...i think i've solved this type of coin mark puzzle.""


some more from my Vamworld posts last Summer (i fixed some typos this time, for this repost) ::

Ken-Pollock Jun 9, 2017
if my re-rolled strip theory is correct, the process should be repeatable. here are some links to the strip rolling process at the Philadelphia & New Orleans mints along with other related links for this thread.

these old mints appear to be complete coin making operations. they smelted
and made the alloy, then poured and created thick alloy strips. these strips
were then rolled to make them the proper thickness for the blanks needed and
these strips also appear to have been rolled to remove surface imperfections.
the strips were punched to make the coin blanks, the blanks were made into
planchets and then the planchets were struck/pressed to produce the desired coin.


excellent article on the coining/minting process at the Philadelphia mint
during 1885 ***

The Mint of the United States of America in Philadelphia
by Ursula Kampmann

"A visit to the year 1885"
http://www.coinsweekly.com/en/Archiv...&id=93&type=a#


New Orleans Mint rolling the strips - Gold Coins of the New … image - Flickr
https://www.flickr.com/photos/coinbooks/3244603839/


Punching_Out_the_Blanks_New_Orleans_Mint_1897
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/F..._Mint_1897.jpg


Rear of New Orleans Mint circa 1866 (pic) link:
https://www.littletoncoin.com/LCC/ht...ces/NOMint.jpg

"The tall smoke stack of the smelting furnace and the loading docks at the rear of the New Orleans Mint dominate this 1866 stereoview by Blessing. ... The mint operated from 1838 to 1861 and 1879 until 1909"
above pic and partial quote are from the Littleton Coin Company website


Old U.S. Mint New Orleans 1905 (pic)
http://i0.wp.com/upload.wikimedia.or...size=400%2C301


Northwest Territorial Mint strip rolling process:
http://custom.nwtmint.com/process_rolling.php


The Royal Mint Museum...maing the strip...a short 1 minute video:
http://www.royalmintmuseum.org.uk/ed...the-strip.html


Incomplete punches look very different before, after strike
By Mike Diamond , Special to Coin World
Published : 03/10/14
http://www.coinworld.com/news/us-coi...fter.all.html#


Incomplete Punch
Part V: Planchet Errors:
Blanking and Cutting Errors:
Incomplete punch (a.k.a, incomplete clip):
http://www.error-ref.com/incomplete-punch/


examples of a 1976 Canadian cent incomplete punch:
https://www.coincommunity.com/forum/...dClipWtBgW.jpg
https://www.coincommunity.com/forum/...800px-Copy.jpg


a 1962 Canadian quarter incomplete punch:
http://alliancecoin.com/assets/image...ch%20Error.jpg


1870 25 cents US pattern coin with incomplete punch similar to my 1889 Morgan in some ways:
https://forums.collectors.com/discus...om/34qoj7a.jpg

[Ken-Pollock]

here are some recent pics of my 1839 O/O F-104 liberty seated dime (with what i call re-rolled incomplete punch marks) that are not at this link: http://www.vamworld.com/share/view/62804198

hopefully these 4 pics will post here. hmm, seems like i can take the images directly from my computer. that's good to know. should help with the pics of my 1845 O dime i want to post later. i think this coin is in the VF range without problems or issues and with nice toning. my pics are just okay. here goes:

Image10.jpg
Image13_1.jpg
Image3_1.jpg
Image16_1.jpg

[diamond]

I have no desire to revisit posts that are 5 years old. As for your dime, your photos are too small, and the resolution too poor, to determine if the curved imperfection is a scratch, a die crack, or a lamination crack. It's definitely not an incomplete punch.

[Ken-Pollock]

okay. maybe someday the knowledge base will catch-up to where i am now, regarding this specific new type of error coin.

maybe these 2 pics of the '39 o/o may help. the obvs. probalbly.

1839 o-o dime pis jan 2018 002a.jpg1839 o-o dime pis jan 2018 005a.jpg

[Ken-Pollock]

and now: a few lower quality pics of the low-end 1845 O dime i mentioned earlier. the re-rolled cut/punch mark on the reverse is U.S. quarter $ sized. while taking these low quality pics, i did notice a mark on the obvs that would also correspond to a "re-rolled" incomplete punch mark...off to the left of the rock & base Liberty sits on. my equipment is certainly not the best...but my "eye" for finding and identifying interesting and tough coins is quite good (liberty seated dimes has been my focus most recently). anyway....

Image5b.jpgImage8b.jpgImage16b.jpgImage21b.jpgImage23b.jpgImage35b.jpgImage28b.jpgImage29b.jpg

[diamond]

Your 1984-0 dime is too heavily worn to make any determination. Your explanation for a "re-rolled" incomplete punch mark is quite farfetched. There is no reason why dollar-thick stock should be punched with dime-sized punch marks, which should, at any rate, appear on both sides of the coin.