I have finally made some time to sort out my collections. Part of this is a section called "Errors" yes I know how to spell it This ranges from Pennies up to Modern Decimal coins. It is not an area I actively pursue, however if I see something or I pick it out if a bulk collection. It definitely goes into the error collection, most cases it is just just luck ? In no particular order, 1. 1919 1d Dot below bottom scroll. Well lucky it is still there. This is caused by impurities in the planchet. When under pressure it blows out. It looks like this coin has still seen a lot of circulation before it found it's way into Aus's stash. 2. 1922 1d "Spur" on N in Penny, you can see why they call them a spur. Can anyone tell me how this actually happens, it is not what you think. 3. 1924 1d With a nice Die Crack running through the "24" through to the rim. A die crack is quite common in errors. If you are to look for something this is one you would likely find. This is caused when the die is starting to weaken and metal gets pushed into the cracks. After time the crack will get too big and it will break off. 4. 1939 1d Slag after A in Australia. Also another error as well. Slag is the same as a die crack except more in one area, is my understanding. There is also another error, can you see it ? 5. 1943 1d Error strike, the coin has not ejected or loaded properly, causing an area not to be pressed. [imgz=http://forums.silverstackers.com/uploads/181_img_4509ss.jpg][/imgz] [imgz=http://forums.silverstackers.com/uploads/181_img_4510ss.jpg][/imgz] 6. 1962 1d Double strike with rotation. The witch nose it what it looks like. This also creates a lot of unique errors across the coin. Look around the rims and in between lettering. 7. 1938 1d This is someone having some fun I believe, or some type of error. I have not been able to work this one out as of yet. Looks like a lot of work just for fun ? [imgz=http://forums.silverstackers.com/uploads/181_19381d_error_mag_30.jpg][/imgz] 8. 1960 1d Thin Planchet. This is really thin, sometimes people would put them on railway tracks and squash them. I don't believe this is the case as the size is exactly the same as a usual penny, when flattened they are normally a little bigger I believe ? 9. 1d Blank Planchet, never stamped either lost, or ejected without being punched. Year unknown ! 10. 1942 3d Another after minting attack, this time someone either pressing or bashing the imprint of another 3d. The date being different means it is after the minting process. 11. 1949 3d Collar error, it has either been jammed or not properly ejected from the die. Causing the edge to curve, this is about a big as a 3d offset I have seen. It is also rotated as you can see by reverse. [imgz=http://forums.silverstackers.com/uploads/181_img_4519ss.jpg][/imgz] 12. 1951 3d PL This is different in that the Planchet appears to be rough. Either that or it is a copy ? The texture is similar to sand blasted with little pits. Yet the die strike is all in good condition. A very different one, and one of my earlier finds. I showed someone and they said, yeah nothing out of place. I have kept it as it is different. I have put another 1951 3d so you can see the difference. There was also a nice find when looking at this as well again not the obvious one either. [imgz=http://forums.silverstackers.com/uploads/181_img_4531ss.jpg][/imgz][imgz=http://forums.silverstackers.com/uploads/181_img_4533ss.jpg][/imgz][imgz=http://forums.silverstackers.com/uploads/181_img_4534ss.jpg][/imgz] 13. 1954 6d (Shilling) Similar to the 1919 1d, fault in planchet causing a blowout. 14. 1942 2/- This is another after mint attack I believe, where the obverse has been machined flat, then engraved with some Letters. Around this time was WWII and a lot of coins were used as love tokens. Not sure if this was the case. I don't believe it to be a specimen or test unit, as the obverse planchet does not have the risen edge. Still something different. [imgz=http://forums.silverstackers.com/uploads/181_img_4521ss.jpg][/imgz] 15. 1982 2c Clipped planchet. These are normally round, caused by the cutter not ejecting the blank from the machine. In this case I believe it to be the end of the bar, they had been using. Hence the straight cut. There are no signs on the other side that the coin had been clamped to create such a cut. 16. 2c Blank Planchet year unkown ! 17. 1968 2c Missing Foot, weak strike. Also the 1968 is the key coin in the series. I have 2 of these now. 18. 1976 10c Someone with a little too much time on their hands. Otherwise not sure. 19. 1972 20c Uncirculated Mint Set. This is a real rare error in My opinion and probably my favourite. It goes to show that things get through. This is a planchet error or clipped when punching. I believe this could be the only one in existence for this year. Also the 1972 is a key date in the Decimal series. I only saw it a few years after I had purchased it. So that is why you should look at things. I don't know of the value but it would be a lot more than a usual 72 set. So there you go 19 varieties and errors. Please feel free to add yours as well. As I come across some more I will add them in. Aus
20. 1917 3d This is known as the Three Legged Emu. Caused by a die crack. This seems pretty common although some good prices showing $60 - $100 some are selling it with an error but not knowing. So some well priced errors to be had.
A couple more while cleaning out the cupboard. 21. 1941 1d with the start of a Planchet flaw. This is in the blank by the looks of it. 22. 1952 1d Planchet de-laminating occurring. It is quite a dramatic error. This is not after damage, as the reverse is in great condition. Anyone else got any to add ?
Somehow "errored" coins seem to have more character than a perfectly stamped coin.... At the very least, they have a story behind them. Thanks for sharing.
I agree, we so many of the usual and these add some character. They are almost always unique, a bit like ourselves. Glad you liked them
I have a nice 27 (parl) florin with a spur and die cracks on the same coin, will try and take a pic tomorrow and upload.
Number 10 might be a brockage. http://www.australianstamp.com/coin-web/history/glossary.htm A coin exhibiting an error caused by the failure of the coin press to release the previous coin from the die before striking it. The design from the first coin is imprinted, sunken in reverse, on the second coin. Brokage coins appear to have the same design on both sides with one side showing a reverse or mirror strike which, because the previous coin acts as the die, does not usually have the same quality of detail.
Hey Ned, not sure which style adds value. However there have been a few very popular and high grade investment errors. Some you may know include our very first Gold Coin. The Adelaide Pound Type 1 got a die crack right at the start of production, hence a new die was needed and you now got Type II Pounds The 1923 Half Penny has an error associated with most coins. The modern $1 2000 Mule is one you may find. In UNC cond one went for over $4K at auction the other year. Maybe some others could give some other examples as well. That would be cool, do you know what causes the spur ? It is quite unusual the way it is done. A pic would be great. At first this is what I thought too. The coin is a 1942 and you see clearly that the imprint has a "5" in it as looking on the LHS. Even a "2" backwards upside down does not represent a "5" I don't think anyway
This is a new error in the series and one which could be missed quite easily. What initially looks like a worn "1" on these 1957 1d's is in fact a blockage in the die. This is normally caused by a build up of grease, oils or some other foreign object. This is one that you could miss, and I did except I got two coins from the same batch with the same error. So I will look through and see if more of the 1957's have a similar error. 23. 1957 1d - Filled die on the "1" on the Reverse Coin 1 Coin 2
I have a clipped 1962 6d, pretty sure another 6d clipped this one as the missing part seems to fit another 6d pretty exactly Not sure if this one is an error or just interesting - a 1963 Florin that has a very, very dull finish alongside a regular Florin for comparison (maybe the planchet escaped a part of the formation process?). Both sides of the coin are a dull grey even after cleaning and it passes weight and 'ping' tests. Any extra info on this one would be appreciated.
Hey Deeb, your clipped one is very cool. I don't think another coin did it. It was probably the die collar, which would be a similar size as well. Although it does look like it has slid, rather than cut the edge. Which could mean another coin was the culprit, as it didn't have a clean sharp edge. Your Florin, when you say dull, is the planchet actually a different surface as well. If you compare error #12 with the 3d this surface is actually a lot different to the others. It is a little duller but under magnification you can see that the surface is rough and not smooth. The only thing I can think of is something has effected the surface. If you used Coke on old copper coins it would change the appearance. Perhaps something similar has happened with this coin ? I would be keen to know more also. If you camera has macro, set it to this. Turn your flash off and get it next to a window or something well lit, and get in really close. This should give us a closer look at the surface. Another trick is to put a loupe in front of your lens and shoot through this. It gives some mag to the shot if you don't have a macro setting. Thanks for sharing
One of the members of our coin club used to work in a plating factory way back when. He told me of one of his co-workers who used to hook up silver coins (which were in circulation then, must have been 50% ones) to the plating baths and plate some of the silver out of the coin. He said this left the coin looking dull, which was then spent back into circulation. I doubt that the guy got much silver this way but I guess if you are bored at work and you aren't paying for any of the equipment then it might be worth your while. Who knows what coins go through in their lifetime!?
The planchet surface appears to be different (rougher) than a regular florin. I'll see if I can get some better pictures of it to share.
This is too show you how the pressure on one face can transfer through the coin and project on that face. This is a $1 2011 RAM head that has been Mint marked after the minting process. They have used a smaller press for this and just punched the "P" mint mark. It has left a raised area on the obverse where this has pushed through. If this was an actual Press the tonnage would be substantially higher. If one side had any weakness the other side would push through. This is actually what causes the Spur re #2 it is King Georges beard that has been punched through ! Turn the coin around and it matches #24 $1 2011 RAM ANDA "P" mintmark - Not really an error parse.
Finally got around to taking some more pics of the dull Florin [imgz=http://forums.silverstackers.com/uploads/2355_florin_arms.jpg][/imgz][imgz=http://forums.silverstackers.com/uploads/2355_florin_queen.jpg][/imgz] The surface seems marginally rougher - comments and thoughts welcomed. I also found some 3d errors (not sure if the last two are die cracks or is there another explanation?) 1. A planchet failure resulting in a peel and also looks like the last '9' is partially filled. [imgz=http://forums.silverstackers.com/uploads/2355_3d_peel.jpg][/imgz][imgz=http://forums.silverstackers.com/uploads/2355_3d_peel1.jpg][/imgz] 2. Possible double die crack through 'E' of Three and 'P' of Pence [imgz=http://forums.silverstackers.com/uploads/2355_doubledie.jpg][/imgz][imgz=http://forums.silverstackers.com/uploads/2355_doubledie1.jpg][/imgz] 3. Possible die crack through 'T' of Australia [imgz=http://forums.silverstackers.com/uploads/2355_diecrack.jpg][/imgz][imgz=http://forums.silverstackers.com/uploads/2355_die1.jpg][/imgz]
Awesome Deeb, thanks for going to the effort and great pics. That Florin does look weird. I can not offer anything either, but Jislizard's post may be close. It does appears rougher. So does my 3d but I can tell it is pre, not post mint. In pic #2 I think you have another die crack at the "T" in Three as well Going from base to rim like the others.
