Weird GW 2007 S found in circulation
mazorj
customer-rolled quarters and dollars, but in a mixed roll of dollars, I
found a 2007 S (yes, S) GW dollar. There's something really funky about it.
There are fingerprints in some of the mirror-finish fields so it's been in
circulation. George's head does have the grainy matte finish like normal
proofs. But his head also entirely covered by an unusual cloudiness and
slight darkening, lacking the normal gold-toned luster of the same matte
areas on normal proofs. Ditto for the raised obverse rim. The reverse rim
and devices are somewhat cloudy but not as bad as the obverse. See below
for the core sandwich error, which probably caused this.
Okay, so far it just sounds like maybe a proof that got put to work as
spending money (a mortal sin IMO but it happens), or maybe a proof strike
that somehow got mixed into a bin of circulation strikes. No big deal.
But on the edge, instead of the usual, approximately matching gold tone,
about one-third of the thickness toward the obverse is a dark silvery tone
and the remaining 2/3 running to the reverse is coppery red. In a normal
presidential dollar the middle 1/3 part of the sandwiched core is coppery
and the two outside 1/3 layers are dark silver. Furthermore, in a normal
specimen the entire edge view of the sandwiching is mostly obscured by a
layer or wash of the gold tone all around the edge. So the edges deviate
from the normal "sandwich" pattern and lack the covering gold tone. Huh?
That's not just a normal proof strike that found its way into circulation.
It's some variety of a bad planchet core that also is entirely lacking in
the normal gold-tone surface finish on the edges.
The origins of many kinds of planchet composition defects are not well
understood. I'm going to see if any of the mint error experts want a look
at this puppy.
Petronius
"mazorj" <maz...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:hfnasu$210$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Perhaps the difference lies in the proof method of manufacture, with the edge
lettering being done by the collar die rather than being rolled on after the
fact.
Why not post a picture?
mazorj
"Petronius" <x...@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
news:hfo72h$24l$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
I knew as soon as I hit Send that someone would ask for a pic. :-)
Okay, will try to get to that. Thanks, I had forgotten about the
different method for the edge lettering on proofs even though I have 3
proof sets showing identical reverse-side surface damage by a broken
collar joint at 10 o'clock, and 3 more showing it in an earlier
damaged die state. However, that wouldn't explain the absolutely bare
edges or the odd sandwiching of the dark silvery and red copper
layers. They should be obscured by toning, and silver-red-silver in
equal thirds, not silver-red-red.
It has little value except as an error curiosity, but mint errors are
the only thing that come close to reviving the old excitement that I
once had for searching rolls.