Quick Update 2015-04-19T11:50:38+00:00
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • RussRuss
    Keymaster
    Post count: 124

    Just a quick word.

    I have another batch of new varieties awaiting attribution, but I dropped my camera twice the other day and now it won’t focus. Within a couple of weeks, I should have a new camera and I’ll post the new varieties.

    It is exciting that so many varieties are still being found. For those that got the last Longacre’s Ledger, I was sort of disappointed with the coins that were attributed as new varieties, with the exception of the RPD.

    Die chips in the portrait are not uncommon on the earlier date cents, especially in 1863 and 1874. I can recall from memory 5-6 such die defects from each year alone. In and of themselves, I don’t personally think that such die chips in the portrait should be attributed unless something else on the coin warrants an attribution, like an RPD – or the chip is very bold and easily seen on all grades. For example, the 1873 ODD-001 is a very bold die chip and worthy of attribution. Rick Snow contends this is a MPD, but scholars disagree. The shape couldn’t have been made by a digit punch, hence the attribution as an oddity rather than a MPD.

    I have a couple of reasons for feeling this way about minor die chips. For one, these die chips are often on the highest parts of the coin, which means they wear off first and can not be found in lower grades. Also, the chips could have occurred during its working life, so it is unclear whether these chips are truly die markers or die states. With the exception of die cracks, cuds, and die dots (like 1875 DOT-001), die states are generally not attributable as varieties. What we do know is that die chips can occur as the die deteriorates with use – the 1903 and 1907 Goatee varieties being prime examples.


    Collecting Flying Eagle and Indian Head pennies never made more cents!

    DVCollectorDVCollector
    Moderator
    Post count: 103

    It is exciting that so many varieties are still being found. For those that got the last Longacre’s Ledger, I was sort of disappointed with the coins that were attributed as new varieties, with the exception of the RPD.

    Yeah–chips don’t really move me much either. I would’ve expected some more MPDs turning up. I actually have noticed a couple candidates, but unfortunately I did not win the auctions. That 1880 ODD-002 is much more interesting than simple die chips.

    For example, the 1873 ODD-001 is a very bold die chip and worthy of attribution. Rick Snow contends this is a MPD, but scholars disagree.

    Is it agreed that the bump in the field of the 1858/7 (S1) is an MPD “1”? I’ve always wondered about that..


    • This reply was modified 3 years, 1 month ago by DVCollector DVCollector.
    RussRuss
    Keymaster
    Post count: 124

    Well, I wouldn’t want to say 100% without seeing an EDS example in hand, which I haven’t. However, by the pictures it doesn’t appear to be from a digit. The 7 above the 8 is most obviously a digit, but the extra metal in the field is triangular shaped. Also, it doesn’t align with the 7 in a way that it could have been from the first impression of the date punch. However, the odd shape could be due to an attempt to polish it out.

    Obviously, the die had to be reworked and I suspect that is when it sustained the damage. If a suspected MPD can’t be accurately overlayed with a digit, then it shouldn’t be called one in my opinion. I just noticed that Kevin’s comment on the OVD-001 was cut off on the webpage. I have fixed it, and I will paste his comment below. I’d have to defer to Kevin on this one, but him mentioning it as a die chip makes me wonder if he doesn’t think it is one. It may have been Larry Steve that advocated for the misplaced 1.

    At any rate, a collector should look for an example with a strong 7 and pay no premium for the strength of the so called 1. If the 7 digit were never there, this would probably have never even been listed as a variety and the 1 in the field written off as a die chip or gouge.

    Overdate: 8 over 7.
    The upper right corner of the 7 can be seen above the second 8 on early die specimens.

    Misplaced Date (in field above date).
    The ‘die chip’ in the field above the date has been identified as the upper left corner from the base of a misplaced 1.

    The upper right wing tip is disconnected. The upper left corner from the base of a 1 is seen in the field above the first 8 and 5.


    Collecting Flying Eagle and Indian Head pennies never made more cents!

    • This reply was modified 3 years, 1 month ago by Russ Russ.
    DVCollectorDVCollector
    Moderator
    Post count: 103

    …the extra metal in the field is triangular shaped. Also, it doesn’t align with the 7 in a way that it could have been from the first impression of the date punch.

    Yes, I have also looked at detailed pictures of EDS examples, and I really can’t see how the “1” figured into the earlier date impression that is part of the overdate. And, are there any other MPDs which are just floating in the fields like that? Of course, that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen–just idle speculation on my part. 🙂


Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.