1951-D Lincoln - What is this error?

[Guest]

I've had this Lincoln for several years, but never closely examined it until now. There is something weird about this coin. The tail of the number "5" in the date "1951" should not be touching the "D" MM but this one is - and it appears to be some sort of extra blob of metal connecting the 5 to the D.

Also, inside of the D, something looks odd. I looked at it under a 20x loupe and the bottom third of the inside of the D appears to be either doubled or disturbed in some way.

I've tried capturing this using the macro setting on my 12 megapixel digicam. I think it did a pretty good job of capturing the first oddity, but not so great on the second one. I've attached 8 macro images taken from various lighting angles for everyone to view. Anyway, any opinions on what this is would be interesting to hear. Thanks.

[Maineman750]

Those are dies chips on the end of the 5 and in the center of the MM. They are caused by pieces of the die "chipping" or breaking off and are fairly common.

[GrumpyEd]

The mintmark is close to the 5 but still withing the normal area, there are a lot of early 50s cents where it's up close to the date.

Die chips are also common, the little post on the die that makes the center of the D was chipped.
Here's an RPM that's not close to the date but has similar chipping starting in the center of the D:

http://www.coppercoins.com/lincoln/diestate.php?date=1951&die_id=1951d1mm036&die_state=lds

[CSAHalfDollar]

That makes sense to me. How much value does this sort of thing add to the coin, if any?

[CSAHalfDollar]

Thanks for your input. I never would have noticed the die chip inside the MM without a 20x magnifying loupe, but the die chip connecting the 5 to the MM was immediately obvious when photographing the coin with my macro setting and when examining it with a 5x magnifying glass. I suspect not much value in these, but if there is any premium attached to these types of errors I'd be interested to know how much, on average.

[GrumpyEd]

Probably no extra value to most people.
But the coin looks nice, 1951 often have nice color.

[CSAHalfDollar]

Probably no extra value to most people.
But the coin looks nice, 1951 often have nice color.

That's about what I figured, but I had to ask. I'm still learning about errors and die varieties and which ones have real value and which are common. Many thanks!

[CSAHalfDollar]

The mintmark is close to the 5 but still withing the normal area, there are a lot of early 50s cents where it's up close to the date.

Die chips are also common, the little post on the die that makes the center of the D was chipped.
Here's an RPM that's not close to the date but has similar chipping starting in the center of the D:

http://www.coppercoins.com/lincoln/d...&die_state=lds

I took another photo of the obverse of this coin and noticed that Lincoln has a cracked skull. So it would indeed appear that this die was in bad shape, because there are problems everywhere. See attached photo...

[GrumpyEd]

Pretty much, it had cracks and chips.
They used dies to that point so it's not uncommon.

[jfines69]

MM were hand punched into dies prior to 1990... They can be all over the place... There are some dies that have been used so much that it is surprising that any coins were struck with them!!!

[BadThad]

That's a cool coin with a lot of character - definitely a keeper!

To answer your question, this is not considered an error nor a variety. Cracks and die chips are just normal mint problems.

[CSAHalfDollar]

That's a cool coin with a lot of character - definitely a keeper!

To answer your question, this is not considered an error nor a variety. Cracks and die chips are just normal mint problems.

That's interesting. I've never heard that before. What about coins like the 1861-O Seated Liberty Half Dollar minted under Union, Confederate, and Republic of Louisiana authorities. My understanding is that these varieties are differentiated by the die states of a prominent die crack on the obverse. I believe NGC and PCGS attribute these national minting authority varieties solely on the basis of those die cracks. If die cracks are considered varieties for that coin, why not for a Lincoln Cent?
Thoughts?

[liveandievarieties]

Cracks are considered markers- they confirm an attribution, they are not used to decide whether a coin is a doubled die or not, but rather confirm which state the die was in when the coin was struck. On the CSA Half you are referring to, the variety is not the crack, the variety is the specific die which was used to strike confederate, then later US halves in New Orleans. The crack is a way of proving the variety, and an easy way of identifying it, but the crack itself is not what brings significant premiums, it's the fact that the die's provenance can be proven, using the die crack as a marker.

[CSAHalfDollar]

Cracks are considered markers- they confirm an attribution, they are not used to decide whether a coin is a doubled die or not, but rather confirm which state the die was in when the coin was struck. On the CSA Half you are referring to, the variety is not the crack, the variety is the specific die which was used to strike confederate, then later US halves in New Orleans. The crack is a way of proving the variety, and an easy way of identifying it, but the crack itself is not what brings significant premiums, it's the fact that the die's provenance can be proven, using the die crack as a marker.

Wow...that's a subtle but important point. Thanks for the clarification. This is most helpful and interesting.