The frequency seems to start to trail-off after 1990 in my observations. 1990's can be heavily polished, I've found 2 examples where the neck was completely polished away.
No correlation there with the single squeeze, but I definitely agree that there is a correlation between prolificity of die clashes and the heavy field abrasion marks. However, I am after something else here.[/QUOTE"
"Something else." As in the type or kinds of abrasives used. As in the ones that might more readily produce trails? I have not seen heavy abrasions on "modern" coins, if that helps any.
Not necessarily pertaining to abrasives, but if the method, system or other equipment used has changed?
Maybe production methods allowed the mint finally realized it was less expensive to produce an abundance of dies for any given year and simply dispose of or cancel them when clashes or damage occurs. No need to spend manpower to polish damaged/worn dies.
(No hoarding of striking error or die error cents.)
Regulation of strike pressures, consistency of feeding planchetts into the striking chamber, etc. may have been scrutinized and adjusted to minimize die damage for modern shield cents.
The frequency seems to start to trail-off after 1990 in my observations. 1990's can be heavily polished, I've found 2 examples where the neck was completely polished away.
Those are great examples of how the field can be severely reduced by polishing and yet no visible die scratches are created. Thanks for posting them. I have also seen a couple where parts of the front jacket were abraded completely away. Those would make a nice illustration for my new article. Not sure I have room for more pictues, but would you grant me permission to use one of them if I decide to?
All opinions expressed are not necessarily shared by willbrooks or his affiliates. Taking them may result in serious side effects. Results may vary. Offer not valid in New Jersey.
Not necessarily pertaining to abrasives, but if the method, system or other equipment used has changed?
Maybe production methods allowed the mint finally realized it was less expensive to produce an abundance of dies for any given year and simply dispose of or cancel them when clashes or damage occurs. No need to spend manpower to polish damaged/worn dies.
(No hoarding of striking error or die error cents.)
Regulation of strike pressures, consistency of feeding planchetts into the striking chamber, etc. may have been scrutinized and adjusted to minimize die damage for modern shield cents.
Good points. This is one of those things we will probably never know for sure. The relative lack of heavy die scratches in current years could be due to a number of various reasons, and believe me, the Mint ain't talking.
All opinions expressed are not necessarily shared by willbrooks or his affiliates. Taking them may result in serious side effects. Results may vary. Offer not valid in New Jersey.
So, the 2018 obverse die clash Jon sent me is abraded all over the entire obverse. While the scratches are not as heavy as the one I posted in the OP, the scratches are still quite visible and they are all over the place, multi-directional, including in the bust area. That is quite interesting. I will probably make mention of that in my new article on abrasion. Thanks for sending the coin, Jon.
All opinions expressed are not necessarily shared by willbrooks or his affiliates. Taking them may result in serious side effects. Results may vary. Offer not valid in New Jersey.
Bookmarks