martinbudden Posted June 8, 2007 Report Share Posted June 8, 2007 I've found an Australian 50c coin with an error. It looks like the planchet used was smaller than usual. When it was stamped, it didn't quite fill the whole die, so the edge around the top of the coin is rounded instead of having the normal angular straight edges. The coin also gets progressively thinner towards the top. The pattern on the obverse side (the Queen's head and the words ELIZABETH II AUSTRALIA 2006) has a kind of striped flare effect radiating out towards the edge, which looks like drag marks from when the planchet flowed outwards in the die as it was stamped. The pattern on the reverse side also has this effect but it's not as clear because the normal design is much "busier". I'm wondering if perhaps it was a 20c planchet... if I had access to some very accurate scales then I could compare the weight to a normal 20c coin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustin43160 Posted June 8, 2007 Report Share Posted June 8, 2007 do you by chance have a picture of it???? it counds neat!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinbudden Posted June 10, 2007 Author Report Share Posted June 10, 2007 Here you are, the best pics I could manage with my digital camera. I have increased the contrast a bit to try to show the "radial flare" effect better. I found a normal coin of the same year for comparison. Here you can see that the error coin is thinner than normal, getting thinner towards the top (the top edge didn't fill the die all the way out to the edge): Here I laid the coins on to of each other, so you can see how the error coin is slightly smaller than normal: I also weighed the coins on my kitchen digital scales. The normal coin is 15g, the error coin is 11g, and a normal 20c coin is 11g... which I think goes a long way towards confirming my theory that the error 50c was struck on a 20c planchet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostDutchman Posted June 10, 2007 Report Share Posted June 10, 2007 it does look like an off metal to me.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustin43160 Posted June 10, 2007 Report Share Posted June 10, 2007 it lust looks like it smushed a lil bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
belg_jos Posted June 10, 2007 Report Share Posted June 10, 2007 Looks like a squeeze-job to me. The design doesn't match, looks bigger on the 'error'-coin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinbudden Posted June 12, 2007 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2007 If it was a squeeze job, wouldn't the design be indented instead of raised? And the metal sure looks right when you have it in your hand next to the other coin. Does anyone know if there is somewhere in Canberra I can take it to get a pro to look at it? I'd love to have this confirmed by someone who knows their stuff and can see it up close for themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostDutchman Posted June 14, 2007 Report Share Posted June 14, 2007 that squished out look comes from the metal flowing inside the chamber. The planchet was smaller then the striking chamber... and when the coin was struck under the enormous pressure the metal tried to fill the entire void. You don't see it too often on coins with a round planchet... but on coins with "sided" planchets you see it from time to time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
belg_jos Posted June 14, 2007 Report Share Posted June 14, 2007 Indeed, after comparing them more carefully, it's indeed the shape of the coin that made it look different than it really is. The strike on a 20c is possible. If so, an offmetal as LDM stated earlier. Offmetals on wrong planchet are always more interesting, because they can be a true error. The offmetals on unknown planchets always look suspicious to me. Regards, Jos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.