Trail Dies feedback/questions thread

[Petespockets55]

Great to hear Mike.
And it is great news to receive strong corroborating support for Will's hard work and efforts.
Look forward to the Attic already and sounds like that LMC with deep abrasions in line with the columns that show up on the steps was helpful? ( I think that coin belongs to 11997755)

[jfines69]

Cool... Sounds like Will and his crew were rite on the money... Congrats to them for their hard work... Thanks for the follow up Mike!!!

[VAB2013]

This is great news! Thank you so much Mike for continuing your study on the mystery of trail dies! Looking forward to reading your upcoming article this weekend!

Will, I also want to thank you for your perseverance and the dedication to your study of the cause of trail dies. I am very happy for you that you are now seeing this come to fruition!

[mikediamond]

I deserve no credit for any progress made on this issue. BJ Neff was the pioneer who pushed these die defects to the forefront. While his theorizing may have been misdirected, he stimulated further research that eventually led to a definitive conclusion. Will Brooks, Ray Parkhurst, and Sean Moffatt deserve the lion's share of the credit for putting this issue to rest.

[VAB2013]

I deserve no credit for any progress made on this issue. BJ Neff was the pioneer who pushed these die defects to the forefront. While his theorizing may have been misdirected, he stimulated further research that eventually led to a definitive conclusion. Will Brooks, Ray Parkhurst, and Sean Moffatt deserve the lion's share of the credit for putting this issue to rest.

Thank you Mike! I would like to commend you for saying this! A definite answer is always more widely accepted when the experts agree. In this case, we appreciate your conclusion in doing that! It was my trail die in Will's article, maybe this one deserves to be framed

[jfines69]

I deserve no credit for any progress made on this issue. BJ Neff was the pioneer who pushed these die defects to the forefront. While his theorizing may have been misdirected, he stimulated further research that eventually led to a definitive conclusion. Will Brooks, Ray Parkhurst, and Sean Moffatt deserve the lion's share of the credit for putting this issue to rest.

Finding the answer is what it's all about... You do deserve some credit tho as you are the one getting this info into your article and published for the rest of us!!!

[willbrooks]

What a surprise to see this update from Mike. Thank you, I appreciate it. I look forward to reading the new article. I would also like to say that Jody Gomez should be included as deserving credit. I am currently of the opinion (as I mentioned at the end of my article) that there are different polishing tools at work. While a soft buff will penetrate the die's incuse devices and cause expansion/distortion, and trails, I speculate that a harder buff/stone intended to aggressively remove clash remnants/die blemishes is responsible for reducing the field of the die. This results in scratches in the field, and (in overzealous cases) results in thinning and tapering of the devices, floating roofs, absent Abes, etc. I did a study about it when someone posted here about tapered peripheral devices on 1996 cents found in uncirculated mint sets. I have powerful visual evidence (provided by Ray Parkhurst) that field polishing is the culprit as opposed to incomplete hubbing, for example. Perhaps I should finish writing that up and submit it as a follow up.

[mikediamond]

I still need to correct the entry on trails/wavy steps on error-ref.com to reflect your findings. Been kinda busy, lately.

[willbrooks]

Mike, can you please specify which issue your new article is in so I can order a copy? I know there are both weekly and monthly editions, so I am not sure what to ask for. Thanks.

[mikediamond]

It's the July 30, 2018 issue. Please be advised that I misidentified the featured cent as being struck in 1989. It actually carries the date 1986. There'll be a correction in the next monthly edition.

[willbrooks]

Thanks! I will go order it. As for the coin date being 1986, maybe you could just say it is a 1989 with inverted 9 error?

[mikediamond]

If you give me your e-mail address, I can send you a pdf copy of the issue.

[willbrooks]

Awesome, Sent it to you via private message. Most appreciated.