1923 Vam 1CK possible Clash?

[Geseas]

Just got my new 10x loupe out of the quarantine tried to look at a shiny spot and next to that spot I saw this:

1923 beany clash near 1_1589150675232~4.jpg (212.07 KiB) Viewed 17609 times

It looked like the top of second "S"in "STATES" from the reverse?
An Overlayed Photo: (attempt)

gcs 23 P beany c. at 1 overlay.jpg (163.93 KiB) Viewed 17609 times

Mirror image rev.

1923 beany C near 1_1589152528072~2.jpg (172.32 KiB) Viewed 17609 times

1923 beany C near 1.JPG (199.76 KiB) Viewed 17603 times

Thanks for any comments.

[The extension png has been deactivated and can no longer be displayed.]

my photos look better on my tv here at home as the monitor. I will keep trying..... Another photo:

WRITERS NOTE HERE;

I have edited the above materal. This may not be proper for me to do. It can make the important following info out of context. How do you prevent this? Just don't do it, maybe a good answer. On the other hand I have discovered this new stuff I think is of value and (to me) fits. An attempt at proper etiquette here.

[Geseas]

gcs 34 bean1.JPG (186.55 KiB) Viewed 17565 times

Better light photo:

GCS2504.JPG (305.8 KiB) Viewed 17562 times

gcs 23 clash inter S.jpg (276.01 KiB) Viewed 17329 times

[messydesk]

That's a feed finger scrape, not a clash mark. Very common. The feed fingers that push finished coins out of the coining chamber sometimes lightly scrape the anvil die (Peace dollar obverse) repetitively enough to impart a shiny spot that grows on the die over time. Some of them have been listed, some not. The locations where these show up tend to be the same on every die.

[Geseas]

That's a feed finger scrape, not a clash mark. Very common. The feed fingers that push finished coins out of the coining chamber sometimes lightly scrape the anvil die (Peace dollar obverse) repetitively enough to impart a shiny spot that grows on the die over time. Some of them have been listed, some not. The locations where these show up tend to be the same on every die.

Thanks JB. I will probably see it again. I have a bunch of these 22 & 23s now.
Please take a look at this next photo.maybe I can show what I've been trying to picture a bit better. I am trying to focus on that eyebrow structure near the top right of the "1". Maybe a clash of the top of "S"?
More likely an illusion from Dark Side. Thanks all.

2020051121085282208_1589246252109.jpg (257.47 KiB) Viewed 17544 times

[messydesk]

Keep in mind how curved the faces of the Peace dollar dies are. In order for anything near the rim to leave a clash mark, the clash would have to be extremely strong or a die would have to be dramatically tilted in the press.

[RogerB]

The convex radius of a Peace dollar die (obv or rev, hardened die) was 25-inches. Draw an arc with a radius of 25 inches on paper. The outside 1.5-inches along the curve is what the face of a Peace dollar die would look like in cross section.

[Geseas]

The convex radius of a Peace dollar die (obv or rev, hardened die) was 25-inches. Draw an arc with a radius of 25 inches on paper. The outside 1.5-inches along the curve is what the face of a Peace dollar die would look like in cross section.

Thanks RogerB and Messydesk, I am sitting at a 48"rd. Table now. I have a 1.5" flat plastic slip on the tables edge. Not much of a convex surface at all. Just the tinest of rocking.
I am thinking that missing planchet thickness would really mess things up also. Two dies coming together, but set up for something to be in between.

[messydesk]

The convex radius of a Peace dollar die (obv or rev, hardened die) was 25-inches. Draw an arc with a radius of 25 inches on paper. The outside 1.5-inches along the curve is what the face of a Peace dollar die would look like in cross section.

Thanks RogerB and Messydesk, I am sitting at a 48"rd. Table now. I have a 1.5" flat plastic slip on the tables edge. Not much of a convex surface at all. Just the tinest of rocking.
...

Now put the edges of two 48" round tables against each other and compare with the depth of a typical clash on a coin. The gap at the edge of your 1.5" section is still almost nothing, but it's bigger than the depth of a clash.

[Geseas]

The convex radius of a Peace dollar die (obv or rev, hardened die) was 25-inches. Draw an arc with a radius of 25 inches on paper. The outside 1.5-inches along the curve is what the face of a Peace dollar die would look like in cross section.

Thanks RogerB and Messydesk, I am sitting at a 48"rd. Table now. I have a 1.5" flat plastic slip on the tables edge. Not much of a convex surface at all. Just the tinest of rocking.
...

Now put the edges of two 48" round tables against each other and compare with the depth of a typical clash on a coin. The gap at the edge of your 1.5" section is still almost nothing, but it's bigger than the depth of a clash.

Good point; I think I know what you mean. You would be doubling that rocking now.
In my experience when you stretch a machine past were it is meant to operate (missing a plancet)things get loose, and unpredictable they may bind. It you go to far something usually breaks.
I was wondering what the lazer etched plexiglass tool mentioned here http://ec2-13-58-222-16.us-east-2.compu ... ashed_dies
would show when you dial it in to this clash area? It looks like an interesting tool. Is the plexiglass flexible? Can you bend it.? Thanks for all your help with this.

[Geseas]

WRITERS NOTE HERE;

I have edited the above materal. This may not be proper for me to do. It can make the important info out of context. How do you prevent this? Just don't do it, maybe a good answer. On the other hand I have discovered this new stuff I think is of value and (to me) fits. Just an attempt at proper etiquette here. I will continue this if no objection.
Thanks for this great venue of expression. Let me have it! I think I can handle it. Please edit.

[messydesk]

WRITERS NOTE HERE;

I have edited the above materal. This may not be proper for me to do. It can make the important info out of context. How do you prevent this? Just don't do it, maybe a good answer. On the other hand I have discovered this new stuff I think is of value and (to me) fits. Just an attempt at proper etiquette here. I will continue this if no objection.
Thanks for this great venue of expression. Let me have it! I think I can handle it. Please edit.

Fair question about editing etiquette. If you edit your own post to change the meaning of the content (not just to fix spelling and grammatical errors), it's best to add the reason for your edit to the bottom of that post, especially if it has already elicited a response or has been quoted.

[Geseas]

WRITERS NOTE HERE;

I have edited the above materal. This may not be proper for me to do. It can make the important info out of context. How do you prevent this? Just don't do it, maybe a good answer. On the other hand I have discovered this new stuff I think is of value and (to me) fits. Just an attempt at proper etiquette here. I will continue this if no objection.
Thanks for this great venue of expression. Let me have it! I think I can handle it. Please edit.

Fair question about editing etiquette. If you edit your own post to change the meaning of the content (not just to fix spelling and grammatical errors), it's best to add the reason for your edit to the bottom of that post, especially if it has already elicited a response or has been quoted.

"Has been Quoted" that is an important point I forgot to consider.

[RogerB]

So....there's a 1923 variety called "Ick" .... must be a mess.

[Geseas]

So....there's a 1923 variety called "Ick" .... must be a mess.

thank you RWB, point well taken. I was going to place this photo (screen shot) and this source carefully above. Probably in our conversation somewhere:

[Geseas]

https://books.google.com/books/about/Th ... dGAQAAIAAJ

......Doesn't like PNG format

https://books.google.com/books?id=xpdGA ... &q&f=false

Screenshot_2020-05-13-16-37-07.jpg (62.4 KiB) Viewed 17414 times

I am interested in the round tables pictured. That radius may have been used by Craftsmen back then. Probably for more than just one purpose. Is that were that 50"dia. arc came from? Thanks RogerB.

[RogerB]

The round things are upsetting machines. They made the blanks true and raised a uniform rounded proto-rim on the blank. When the blanks came out they were called planchets suitable for striking. Height and angle of upsetting had significant impact (pun intended) on the quality/fullness of detail on finished coins. A very clear comparison can be made between MCMVII double eagles with a prominent fin rim, and the late-December issue with almost no trace of fin. The only difference was in planchet upset and angle.

Here's a little clearer version of the photo.

Mint-New International Encyclopædia-1907 4 detail.jpg (107.19 KiB) Viewed 17407 times

A worker sat on the stool, and poured blanks in to the machine. As it operated the completed planchets were expelled down the square wooden tube into the wooden receiving box. Wood was used to avoid marring the planchets. Non-uniform planchets could stick in a press' feeding tube and cause delay while the obstruction was cleared.

The tall chair with a back, at right, was where the foreman sat watching the workers, and maybe reading the newspaper. The foreman adjusted and reset the machines for each denomination being operated on that day.