1968 d and 1966 penny error
1 1

7 posts in this topic

409 posts

I have two more puzzling ones for us. Lol. I found the 68 about a month ago but didn't think much of it. But found the 66 today  and it looks the same . Could this be a die chip. This is kinda strange. It's the next column over to the right of Lincoln at the top.

20191202_145311.jpg

20191202_145420.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
409 posts

You can see something going on, to the third column over on left side of Lincoln. At the bottom corner. 

20191202_185623.jpg

20191202_185646.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
159 posts

Strong die clash from Abe's bust, particularly on the 68. That's what I think anyway, but I don't have the software to make an overlay. Inside the columns just right of center appears to be the nape of the neck under the chin from the obverse. Nice pictures.

PS - scroll down for an overlay here and some typical examples. http://www.maddieclashes.com/typical-die-clash-u-s-small-cent/

Edited by kbbpll

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
409 posts
11 hours ago, kbbpll said:

Strong die clash from Abe's bust, particularly on the 68. That's what I think anyway, but I don't have the software to make an overlay. Inside the columns just right of center appears to be the nape of the neck under the chin from the obverse. Nice pictures.

PS - scroll down for an overlay here and some typical examples. http://www.maddieclashes.com/typical-die-clash-u-s-small-cent/

So are these just errors or are they variatietys. I'm not seeing anything by searching these on line. But I put them in 2x2 flips for safe keeping. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
159 posts

Good question, I don't know whether it's "technically" an error or a variety. It's a mint error (clanging the dies together without a planchet) that can produce many coins - for as long as they continue to use the "damaged" die. So in that sense of repeatability, to me it's also a variety. I'm not a Morgan collector but I believe many of the VAM listings are distinguished by die clashes (I could be wrong; go look some up I guess). And as you can see on the Mad Die Clashes site, they have designated many of them with "variety" numbers. Your 1966 is not quite the same as this 1966 - http://www.maddieclashes.com/tdc-1c-1966-01/. I'd keep yours too, particularly the 1968-S. Other collectors don't like them - if somebody wants a pristine MS67 or whatever, they might not want the distracting marks of the clashes. Myself, I consider it a bonus when I find them. It adds interest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
409 posts
14 minutes ago, kbbpll said:

Good question, I don't know whether it's "technically" an error or a variety. It's a mint error (clanging the dies together without a planchet) that can produce many coins - for as long as they continue to use the "damaged" die. So in that sense of repeatability, to me it's also a variety. I'm not a Morgan collector but I believe many of the VAM listings are distinguished by die clashes (I could be wrong; go look some up I guess). And as you can see on the Mad Die Clashes site, they have designated many of them with "variety" numbers. Your 1966 is not quite the same as this 1966 - http://www.maddieclashes.com/tdc-1c-1966-01/. I'd keep yours too, particularly the 1968-S. Other collectors don't like them - if somebody wants a pristine MS67 or whatever, they might not want the distracting marks of the clashes. Myself, I consider it a bonus when I find them. It adds interest.

Thank you kbbpll, difently keepers, really interesting talk pieces. 

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
1 1