1984P Feeder Finger Damage?

[joel]

I found this 1984P with possible Feeder Finger Damage. Is this correct? Thanks for looking.

[enamel7]

No Joel, they're not. Feeder finger damage would show up on the fields only. At least that's the only place I've ever seen them.

[jfines69]

Pics 6 and 7 look like they are linear plating bubbles... 1 thru 5 they look like gouges??? Could be my eyes tho :LOL_Hair:

[willbrooks]

So far, there is no such thing as obverse feeder finger scrapes. (edit: None reported on Lincoln cents, I mean)


Feeder Finger Damage: Damage in the form of scrapes to the anvil die which occur when the feeder finger (http://www.lincolncentforum.com/terminology-list-f/#Feeder%20Finger) inadvertently rubs across it. On memorial cents, these die scrapes always show on the coin in a NW to SE direction and until the mid 90s, only on the reverse of coins, as the reverse die had always been the anvil die (http://www.lincolncentforum.com/terminology-list-a/#Anvil%20Die) up until that point. Inverse die installation (http://www.lincolncentforum.com/terminology-list-i/#Inverse%20Die%20Installation) began in the mid 90s, but thus far there are no known examples of obverse feeder finger damage on Lincoln cents. On older cents, such as this 1944S wheat pictured below, these feeder finger scrapes exhibit in a N-S direction. I am currently unaware of when the angle of the feeder finger to the die was altered. That coin and photo are courtesy of forum member Roller.
http://www.lincolncentforum.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/feederfingerwheat-150x150.jpg (http://www.lincolncentforum.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/feederfingerwheat.jpg)http://lincolncentforum.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/finger-damage-150x150.jpg

(http://lincolncentforum.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/finger-damage.jpg)
I am having the same problem as Jim. The pictures of the head area look like scracthes in the coin, but the vest area, they look like a plating disturbance. Pictures are playing tricks with my eyes again.

[onecent1909]

Just for note: Feeder Finger Damage as pointed out by Will is "Scrapes" or damage to a die...
So it would be a raised area on a coin.
Your coin looks like cuts into the head of Lincoln so it is damage
And the fingers would only "rub" and cause damage to the field as pointed out by Gillbert as the design is lower than the field and would not be touched by the fingers

[enamel7]

I forgot about the reverse only rule.

[jfines69]

I have a question... Uh Oh... I thought at one time the mint did not always have the rev die as the anvil die... They would put the obv as the anvil die??? Not sure where I got the thought from??? I just seem to remember a discussion somewhere about that?????????

[mikediamond]

The narrow incisions could be pre-strike planchet damage or post-strike damage. Examination under a microscope is a must in this case. Feeder scrapes are known on both the anvil die, the hammer die, and both dies simultaneously, at least in quarter dollars. For the hammer die to be affected, there must be some sort of mistiming involved.

[mikediamond]

I have a question... Uh Oh... I thought at one time the mint did not always have the rev die as the anvil die... They would put the obv as the anvil die??? Not sure where I got the thought from??? I just seem to remember a discussion somewhere about that?????????

Inverted die installation (obverse die as anvil die) has been the norm since 2002. The changeover was gradual and took 10 years (1992 - 2002). It only became common in 1997. So there are many years in which either die functioned as the anvil die.

[willbrooks]

So far, there is no such thing as obverse feeder finger scrapes.



The narrow incisions could be pre-strike planchet damage or post-strike damage. Examination under a microscope is a must in this case. Feeder scrapes are known on both the anvil die, the hammer die, and both dies simultaneously, at least in quarter dollars. For the hammer die to be affected, there must be some sort of mistiming involved.

Thanks for the additional information, Mike. I was specifically referring to Lincoln cents with my comment, but I have edited it to make sure there isn't any confusion for anyone. I was unaware about the quarters.


I have a question... Uh Oh... I thought at one time the mint did not always have the rev die as the anvil die... They would put the obv as the anvil die??? Not sure where I got the thought from??? I just seem to remember a discussion somewhere about that?????????

Maybe it was from 3 posts above yours where I mentioned that very thing! :sign10:

"...as the reverse die had always been the anvil die (http://www.lincolncentforum.com/terminology-list-a/#Anvil%20Die) up until that point. Inverse die installation (http://www.lincolncentforum.com/terminology-list-i/#Inverse%20Die%20Installation) began in the mid 90s, but thus far there are no known examples of obverse feeder finger damage on Lincoln cents...."

[jfines69]

Thanks for the additional information, Mike. I was specifically referring to Lincoln cents with my comment, but I have edited it to make sure there isn't any confusion for anyone. I was unaware about the quarters.



Maybe it was from 3 posts above yours where I mentioned that very thing! :sign10:

"...as the reverse die had always been the anvil die (http://www.lincolncentforum.com/terminology-list-a/#Anvil%20Die) up until that point. Inverse die installation (http://www.lincolncentforum.com/terminology-list-i/#Inverse%20Die%20Installation) began in the mid 90s, but thus far there are no known examples of obverse feeder finger damage on Lincoln cents...."

:sign10: I knew I had seen that before!!! :LOL_Hair: