'96 Lincoln w/ feeder finger gouges?
2 2

28 posts in this topic

707 posts

Hey fellows. So I was looking through my clad Lincolns and checking Wexlers site against them. While I don't have a DD on this coin what Wexlers refers to as feeder finger gouges is also on my coin, in the same spot and the same year and Mint. So I am ready to label it as such and stick it in my pile and someone says that the marks on mine are not feeded finger gouges, but are merely LPB's. His reason was that there aren't as many feeder fingers as there are gouges on my Cent and that the marks on my coin is not identical to the one listed on Wexlers. Just curious of what you guys think about it. I think the marks are the same as 1996DDR-001.

Screenshot_2018-09-11-12-23-53.png

img_1536553241513.jpg

img_1536553211667.jpg

img_1536553178467.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
707 posts
16 hours ago, Old-school said:

Hello, I'm not sure about the markings on your coin, but at least you have a reply. 😇

That means a whole big ole bunch to me. Thank you very much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
707 posts
4 hours ago, Six Mile Rick said:

Looks to me like a rough die cleaning or scar scratches on face of reverse die.(shrug)

So def not feeders fingers, huh? Ok. I'm just looking for answers to add for my "explanations" file. Thanks so much for the input. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
707 posts
Just now, KarenHolcomb said:

So def not feeders fingers, huh? Ok. I'm just looking for answers to add for my "explanations" file. Thanks so much for the input.  Question...if they are from something basically imprinted on on the die then there will be multiple cents that have the same marks, correct?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,871 posts

The marks going through ONE, on both coins, are die gouges (heavy scratches in the die). It is unclear what caused them, but often they are the result of excessive filing and polishing to remove clash marks and other defects from a particular die. These can sometimes be interesting, but rarely do they add value.

Edited by coinman1794

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
707 posts

Thanks Condor. I think they are very similar to the photo in err-ref.

That said, Coinman, in err-ref.com they show that 1st photo up top here and refer to the marks as Feeder Finger Gouges. So if the lines on my coin are caused by the same scenario then they are FFG too, right. I wouldn't imagine that John Wexler would be mistaken-but anything is possible. And I wouldn't imagine how the pictures and my coin and wexlers coin can be so much alike but not caused by the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,871 posts

I'm not familiar with when and where finger feeders are used, but it is possible that feeder fingers made gouges in the dies, as well. The exact cause would have no affect on the value.

Edited by coinman1794

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
707 posts
On 9/20/2018 at 12:12 PM, coinman1794 said:

I'm not familiar with when and where finger feeders are used, but it is possible that feeder fingers made gouges in the dies, as well. The exact cause would have no affect on the value.

I guess I'm gonna have to study the purpose and action of the feeder fingers next. And here I thought I already knew it all! Not. Lol! 

Coinman, you have me all wrong. At this point I've long since figured out that I'll never get rich off my pocket change and have changed my interest more toward learning everything I can about everything there is to learn about Numismatics, so that everyone will think that I am a genius because I know it all. Really, that's my goal. Although I may purchase a coin now and then if it tickles my fancy extra fast. 

See I have a folder that I add copys of all the different damage I find, whether mint made or PMD, with circles and arrows and a paragraph on each one explaining what happened to make whatever mark as it was explained to me. See? If you thought of Alice's Restaurant there then we can be friends.

Really the reason I even looked at my 1st Wheatback was because I have too much time to do nothing and collecting coins seemed like something I could enjoy and would make the hours alone not quite so long. Thus far it has served that purpose and so I am happy. Yes, I had hoped to get rich in a short amount of time, or at least be able to afford to start a real collection, but those thoughts quickly went by wayside and I was dumb to even have them. But the vast number of coins and the information behind them thrills me as much as getting rich so that's what I'll do. Learn about them and pass on what I learn to those that care to listen. See? Not everyone is here just to make a buck and I am truly sorry if that is your impression of your fellow collectors. Do have a nice day, Sir.

Edited by KarenHolcomb
Typos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,871 posts

You took my comment too literally. My point was only that it is impossible to tell what caused most die gouges; and therefore, they are collected on the basis of their mere presence, and not typically designated or collected by their cause.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,516 posts

Feed fingers push the struck coin off the die, bring in the next planchet, and drop it into the coining chamber.  If the upper die is set too low, or the anvil die does not retract properly the fingers can scrape across the surface  of the die face.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,871 posts
10 hours ago, Conder101 said:

Feed fingers push the struck coin off the die, bring in the next planchet, and drop it into the coining chamber.  If the upper die is set too low, or the anvil die does not retract properly the fingers can scrape across the surface  of the die face.

That is an interesting point. I never imagined the dies making contact like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
707 posts
20 hours ago, coinman1794 said:

You took my comment too literally. My point was only that it is impossible to tell what caused most die gouges; and therefore, they are collected on the basis of their mere presence, and not typically designated or collected by their cause.

See, that's where I WANT to be. The one that figures out what occured to cause that particular mark. Like, I know that's likely impossible past a certain point, but for example,  I hate the group terms people use like machine double and planchet error, because there are different facets that cause different looking machine doubling and SOOOO many different defects that a planchet can have. I want to see a name on it, see? Die wear is the worst. I mean a worn die can encompass 30 different errors and I want to know what causes each. Does that make sense? I know most folks don't give a darn amd it is a useless endeavor, but I am still young enough to figure it all out. Even if only for muself. Gives me something to do anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
707 posts
16 hours ago, Conder101 said:

Feed fingers push the struck coin off the die, bring in the next planchet, and drop it into the coining chamber.  If the upper die is set too low, or the anvil die does not retract properly the fingers can scrape across the surface  of the die face.

That's what I want to know. Things just like that. Thanks Condor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
707 posts
8 hours ago, Just Bob said:

Are they 8 by 10 color glossy pictures?

:bigsmile:

They are. Idk if they will make much difference if I try to show them to a blind judge with a seeing eye dog. I so look forward to Thanksgiving each year more for Mr Guthrie than the bird.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,402 posts
10 minutes ago, KarenHolcomb said:

They are. Idk if they will make much difference if I try to show them to a blind judge with a seeing eye dog. I so look forward to Thanksgiving each year more for Mr Guthrie than the bird.

Just a typical case of American Blind Justice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,871 posts
21 hours ago, KarenHolcomb said:

See, that's where I WANT to be. The one that figures out what occured to cause that particular mark. Like, I know that's likely impossible past a certain point, but for example,  I hate the group terms people use like machine double and planchet error, because there are different facets that cause different looking machine doubling and SOOOO many different defects that a planchet can have. I want to see a name on it, see? Die wear is the worst. I mean a worn die can encompass 30 different errors and I want to know what causes each. Does that make sense? I know most folks don't give a darn amd it is a useless endeavor, but I am still young enough to figure it all out. Even if only for muself. Gives me something to do anyway.

Things like this interest me as well. We are few and far between, though!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
707 posts
2 hours ago, coinman1794 said:

Things like this interest me as well. We are few and far between, though!

Hey Coinman, your notif was in Blue! I wonder what's up with that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
707 posts
11 hours ago, kennyj said:

I've seen these type of marks on cents that I have searched; saved a few of them along with the die crack ones.

I'm thinking that there have to be more out there. Unless it is feeder finger damage then it could well be just the one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,516 posts
1 hour ago, KarenHolcomb said:

Unless it is feeder finger damage then it could well be just the one.

No because feed finger damage is damage done to the die not the coin.  The constant scraping of the fingers across the surface of the die face wears grooves into it.  So the marks are in the die and are transferred to every coin they strike until the marks are polished out or the die replaced..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
707 posts
3 hours ago, Conder101 said:

No because feed finger damage is damage done to the die not the coin.  The constant scraping of the fingers across the surface of the die face wears grooves into it.  So the marks are in the die and are transferred to every coin they strike until the marks are polished out or the die replaced..

Poh, I misunderstood. I thought you said something about the fingers like pulling the finished coin out  of the collar when it was done. Guess I should go read it again. Thanks Condor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
707 posts

Ok then. Idky Wexler would have called that feeder finger strike through? Unless it would be a very minor scrape. These photos on err-ref look nothing like my coon. Those thing rip a coin to pieces. Thanks guys for making me look harder. Still not sure what it is. But i feel like I know what it's not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
2 2