2007 1c Die Clash

[Russellhome]

Well, it is not the 'Jailhouse Bars' clash like the earlier memorial cents, but it is clearly a clash. An impression of the center reverse bay is visible under the ear and a few whisps of hair are visible under the memorial building. Nothing is visible in the bays nor in the field to either side of Lincoln's profile. I guess these new lower profile Lincoln cent dies just bang together in a different way than the earlier dies.





Am I just missing these, or are clashes on the newer cents a little harder to come by than on the older cents? This is the first post 2000 clash I've found.

[Bob P]

This is common on the newer cents. I have about 9 tubes of them. You are most likely to find them on 2000-2007 cents. You are right that it is a clash.

[Dick]

Ken, this is not a clash. It is "doubling", the nasty kind that is worth nothing, other than as a learning aid. This is Machine doubling. Thought you might like to see it.




Dick

[Russellhome]

I've got a few of those stuck away. When MD gets that impressive, it is interesting enough to keep. When I was first starting out, that stuff really got your heart racing. But thankfully, I don't get fooled by such examples any more. I've done enough embarrasing posts as it is.

[Dick]

Ken, I don't feel embarassed when I post something that is wrong, nor should you. Look at it this way: Were you embarasses when you took your first steps, and fell down? This is no different. We will make mistakes, and we will profit from them. It is how we do things. Welcome to my imperfect world. Here it is okay to make "b00-b--s"!
Dick

[Dick]

John, those are curiosity coins. They have no premium value. I keep the more outlandish ones, but they are nothing more than "another MD".
Dick

[wavysteps2003]

Some info on clashes: It appears that die clashing happens more than we think, however, not all clashes are dramatic. Of course the more dramatic the more worth it has. So if you have any of these, put them aside.

1. Prisoner cent (any year memorial that shows Lincoln with "bars" (columns)

2. Reverse clashes that show the letters of LIBERTY. The T is the most common to be seen, with a rare one showing RTY.

3. Reverse clashes that show at least four seperate clashes. Of course, the more seperate clashes shown, the more valuable it is. Obverse clashes of two or more seperate being shown.

On machine damage doubling: There are those that feel this type of doubling is an error and deserves a higher position than just damage. I tend to agree with their assessment. It should be classified as an error coin since it was made from faulty equipment inside the MINT. Do not be fast to chuck those extreme examples of MDD back into circulation. The future may hold a different esteem for this type anomaly.

BJ Neff[/i]

[Dick]

BJ, I concur 100%! I might add that the "E" on "ONE" is frequently seen on the obvrese of the wheats, in the area of the vest, and next to the date, as well as the stems of the wheat stalks, or sprigs, aas the case may be. They will show just below the "IN GOD", on the left, (K-11), and once on a while on the "TRUST" side.
I am confused with your #3. Did you mean three separate places, or times? Times would indicate a "re-cycling ". I trust you meant places!
MD's? We consider them as "worthless", unless very dramatic. The Canadians show them as having value. As you say, BJ, they occur DURING THE MINTING PROCESS, which should be cause for their inclusion in the "errors", lcategory. Also listed there, are the DDD's. Same validation.
Ken, I didm't see your post, until now, but, yes that id clash. I have some 2007-P with the bays going out across the jaw, and into the field, as well as behind the neck!. Do you also find a severely "cracked head", on the obverse?

Dick

[Russellhome]

[Haskett]

Hi everyone,

Just joined today. I'm interested in learning about die clashes. I may be confused about varieties and errors. Isn't the 1955 double die an error coin? Isn't the 1955 double die also a variety, after all, it is different than a normal 55. Wouldn't anything different from the normal cent be considered a variety of that cent. What would be the term for a die that produces the same error over and over. A variety? What would the term be for a die state that produces a different variety? What would the term be for a die state that is producing different errors?
The reason I ask is because I finally figued out what the funny shadowy raised line is on the back of an early lincoln ms65 cent. It's lincolns portrait. Now this would be a particular die in a particular die state which would have attributes such as die cracks. This is what I'm interested in, similiar to the 22 no D. What is a 22 no D? an error or a variety? To me, not knowing much, a 22 no D is a particular die in a die state or condition, and that would make it a variety? no? ok, enough questions for now.

Richard

[Bob P]

Richard,
To answer your questions in some sort of order, first of all, the 1955 Doubled Die (notice the d at the end of double) is a variety since it was made during the hubbing process. The 1955 'Poor mans doubled die' is actually die deterioration doubling. Since this happened AFTER the die was hubbed, and while the coins were being struk, it would be considered an error. If the same die produces the same anomaly over and over again from the first strike to the last, it should be a variety. Now..if a die clashes, then the resulting damage will show up on subsequent coins to some degree. This is still an error since it occurred during the striking process.
Die states do not produce errors or varieties. It only changes the appearance or strength of the anomaly.
As far as the 1922 no D/ weak D, this can be considered an error if the die was punched with the D mintmark, and it filled with grease or wore to the point where the D was no longer visible. Since 1922 cents were only minted in Denver, we know that all of those cents should have the D mintmark. If the D was inadvertently left off the hub, then this would be a variety since it happened before the strikings began.
I know this can be confusing. The terminology for varieties/errors has been misused for many, many years. It is up to forums like this and CONECA and the like to educate folks in the proper terminology. We will be happy to address any other questions you might have.

[eagames]

Haskett,

I think I saw your clash on the CU forum, that 1912-S is a nice rare coin to find in a 65 RB with or without a clash. Nice coin!

In reality it might not increase the value a lot just because the coin is so valuable itself without a clash. It's sort of like a minor variety or error on a nice BU cent you find in change increases in value since it went from no value to some value but many $20 double eagles are varieties and the value is not much more than one without the variety.

Still it's a neat coin to have and neater with the cool clash.

[coop]

Welcome to the site Haskins. About your 1912-S coin. It may have been found that year and put aside, because of the die clash. The finder probably realized that it would be worth something in the future. Now if he had saved rolls of 1912-S Cents he would have realized a profit also. But Cents then were like dollars today. So saving rolls of coins may have been out of the budget. But that may be the reason the finder put back this coin. Glad someone who has it appreciates what it is.

[Haskett]

Thanks everyone for your responses. I like the atmoshpere over here on coppercoins. Thanks Bob for the detailed explanations on errors vs varieties.

Regards,
Richard