Let's talk De-Lamination

[Arjohn]

As I have searched I have racked up a good handful of delaminated Cents. What is this considered? A Variety?-I doubt that. Damage?-Most likely but a desirable sort of damage? Error?-Bad choice in planchet stock? Secondly, do they command much of a premium? I ask because; other than a few, I plan to sell (or attempt to sell) some off. I love finding them, but other than a few for examples - I really don't want to become a storehouse for them. I can't seem to find many on E-Bay -- perhaps my search parameters need to be better.

[Maineman750]

It would be an error. Prices vary depending on the "cool" factor. Try "lamination" or just plain "error" in your searches...I know quite a few people were selling them on eBay in the past.

[jcuve]

It is an alloy error that leads to bits of the copper breaking or peeling off the coin. The bigger the area, the more dramatic, the better a possible price.

[BadThad]

COPPERCOIN CC FORUM 21MAR2011 CHUCK DAUGHTREY

Okay...here goes, but I KNOW I have posted this in and around here a number of times. It's actually VERY simple, and everyone has it wrong to some extent or another.
type - A major change in design. I don't think I need say more, except that ANY use of the term "type" other than to describe the "Franklin half dollar type versus the Kennedy half dollar type" or a "major U.S. Type set" are wrong. The term "type" does NOT apply to mintmark styles, doubled die classes, etc.
variety - A change that was meant to take place but was not necessarily meant to be noticed. Mintmark styles, date sizes, minor detail changes (re-engraving, etc.), changes in font (1976 dollars), large letters vs. small letters...these are ALL "varieties". The 1979-S proof coins have two "varieties" - 1 and 2. They are NOT "types".
die variety - An anomaly on a die that is repeated throughout the die's life - from the first coin struck to the last coin struck. Included are doubled dies, repunched mintmarks, over mintmarks, repunched dates, and over dates. ALL of these were on the die when it entered service, and were on the die when it was retired.
error - Subdivided into three classes - Planchet, Die, and Strike. Planchet errors are errors that occurred with the planchets before they entered the coining process. Laminations, although very common, fall under this group. Die errors are problems that occur with the die while it is striking coins. Cuds fall into this group, as do major clashes, overpolishing, etc. They are generally repeated ONLY after they occur. Coins struck BEFORE the die error are normal. Striking errors comprise the vast majority of errors, and happen as the result of the strike. The planchet and die could have been completely normal, but because of a problem at the moment the coin was struck you end up with an error. Double struck, saddle struck, broadstruck, etc.
So...examples...
1. A CUD is a die error. It's a break in the die that occurred after the die was hung on the press for use.
2. An unplated planchet is a planchet eror. It was not plated when it entered the process.
3. A doubled die is a die variety. The die had doubling when it was created and ALL coins struck by it show the same doubling.
4. An 1858 large letters F.E. cent is a variety. There is a small letters variety as well.
5. A close AM 1992 cent is actually an error. It's a mule. An unintended design coupled with another design.
6. A 1937D three-legged buffalo nickel is a die error. Overpolishing occurred on the die after it started striking coins.
7. The 1942/1 Mercury dimes are actually doubled dies. In order to have an over date, the date would have to have been punched into the die separately from the hubbing process. This is not the case. In fact, ALL 20th century coins with two different dates (unintended) are doubled dies - class 3, design hub doubling, to be exact.
8. A quarter struck on a dime planchet is a striking error. The planchet was normal - just the wrong one.
9. A quarter struck on stock intended for a dime (thinner) is a planchet error. The planchet was flawed before it was struck.
If you really follow the rules above, everything can be properly explained and most of the guessing can simply end. If everyone would use the terms above as defined, we could enter an age where everyone understands them, everyone can teach them, and those who learn can enjoy collecting coins UNDERSTANDING the process that made them. Moreover, they can completely and properly understand WHY separate terms are used to describe them.
Another important area to cover is when the die varities, varieties, and errors DO get mixed up on the same coin, we often see the case of a white elephant that is difficult to sell, because very few collectors want (or care about) all the parts involved. I will explain:
A 1946S 'serif-S' variety Lincoln wheat cent (type) has a die variety - a doubled die obverse. It is also a striking error, it was struck 20% off-center. This is a case of a coin that is a variety, die variety, AND an error all in one.
Normally the die variety is hypothetically worth $15. The variety (mintmak style) is common, so it doesn't figure into all of this - it was merely an example to show that all three can be on one coin.
Normally a 1946S Lincoln cent that is struck 20% off center would sell for $10 (hypothetical again).
So here we have a $20 die variety on a $10 error. Who would buy it for $30? Well, not the error collector, because they could care less about the die variety. To them it's a $10 error. The die variety collectors don't want it because some of the detail that's missing is the detail that shows the doubling. To them the coin is basically worthless. They are into the doubling, not missing details. So wat turns out to be a very scarce instance of a die variety/error coin turns into a coin that won't sell because of it's predicament.
You see, there REALLY IS a difference, and there REALLY ARE people who collect one or the other but not both. When you start mixing them together and charging a premium for each different thing that would make a premium, you lose 99% of your buyers.
I have said it before a number of times, I am a die variety collector and couldn't care less about errors. I wouldn't pay much of a premium for an off-center cent, but I would pay really good money for some doubled dies. There are other people who would pay a premium for an obvious error, but wouldn't give you a dime extra for a doubled die if you couldn't see it at arm's length.
These things have different names because their collectors are classified differently and have different interests that have to do with different parts of the minting process.

A die dent, while very minor and acceptable and not really any sort of error, variety, or die variety, would most easily be calssified as a die error since it is something that happens to the die after it is hung for use. A die variety is known to exist on the die during the creation of the die, thus has to be on the die when it is first hung on the press to make coins.
Die errors include clash marks, overpolishing that removes devices, cuds, and other irreversible things that "occur" to the die...which is THE difference between die errors and die varieties. Die errors happen to otherwise normal dies. Die varieties are not normal when they are made.
Don't paint it with too broad a brush - just because it is narrowed down to a die does NOT make it a die variety.

[coppy]

6. "A 1937D three-legged buffalo nickel is a die error. Overpolishing occurred on the die after it started striking coins".

Question: Is there (or should there be) two categories of this particular type of die error... intentional & unintentional?
For example... a greaser(or any filled die) may be unintentional die error(mint employees had no hand in this), and a die error from overpolishing may be intentional.


Or is this irrelevant?

[mustbebob]

I get what you are getting at, but in this case, it might be considered irrelevant.
I think any abrading is intentional. They obviously saw something that needed to be removed, whether it was a clash mark or something else. I don't know how you could determine if any abrading was unintentional.

[coppy]

I get what you are getting at, but in this case, it might be considered irrelevant.
I think any abrading is intentional. They obviously saw something that needed to be removed, whether it was a clash mark or something else. I don't know how you could determine if any abrading was unintentional.

Yes, an abrading job is intentional... which was the point of my questioning: An error, by definition (to me anyway), is an outcome that was not intended. Not meant to be. A mistake.
And a filled-die error falls under this definition.

But should an outcome(such as three-legged Buffalo nickel) due to an intentional act (overpolishing) be considered an "error"?
If yes, then would it be more accurate to label it as an "intentional error"? (heck then, would it be considered an oxymoron?)



Or have I opened a can of worms?

[mustbebob]

But should an outcome(such as three-legged Buffalo nickel) due to an intentional act (overpolishing) be considered an "error"?

Once again, I see where you are going. The abrading of the die is in fact an intentional act to correct a problem. The unintentional RESULT is that it became a collectible because of that action.
Like I said...I really do get what you are saying. I personally don't believe the 3 legged Buffalos are any different than any other coin that had detail removed from it because of abrading. In my mind, we should call it what it is and not assign any show stopping names such as this and others. If I had to assign a name, I think rip-off would be appropriate

[Arjohn]

Wow -- Thank you BadThad -- I actuall am going to print that and put in in my binder of Coin info....... Is it sticky anywhere -- I will search for it when I want it but if someone knows for sure I'd appreciate it...

[mustbebob]

Understand that the info Thad put here came from another forum and was written by Chuck. Technically, we could link to it, but should not cut and paste it. The proper thing would be to ask him if it is all right if we use it here, especially if we want to make a sticky out of it.