First (Official) Dime Box

[WheatFromChaff]

Got bored waiting for my halves to show up, so I snagged two dime boxes and one nickel box at my pick-up bank. The nickels and one of the dime boxes were brand new 2016P, so that was frustrating (especially since my dump bank only takes loose coins), but the second dime box was rewarding. I forced myself to date-check because after searching hundreds of dollars of dimes, I somehow STILL don't have a 1971P. I've now found multiple silvers, 2009Ps and Ds, and every other clad date and mint, but still no 1971P. I'm almost ready to start calling it a semi-key date. Anyway, it's a good thing I actually looked at the coins, because rim-checking would have only yielded this worn 1963D
I would have missed these 2009Ps
These 2015P and 2010P greasers
This 2014P die crack
And the more exciting potential defective die on this 2008P (Note field near IN GOD WE TRUST and Roosevelt's neck
And, best and last, this 2005P with cuds on hair and neck
Sorry if I bored you folks, I know most of those are pretty mundane, but I thought the cuds were pretty neat.

HH All

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[MackinawGirl]

Don't worry about boring people who already know, because there are us new CRHter's that like to learn what to look for. Thanks for the information. Happy Hunting!

 

[Tommybuckets]

Very educational. I throw back the errors like the 2015 and 2010 "greasers" . I assumed in the past that they were weak strikes or strange wear or something. Should I be saving them? I also stopped saving the 2015 and 2016 p with the distorted rim. At first glance they look double die but I think the die is just worn out. The cud and die crack are super cool and those are the errors I look for but with far less luck than yourself.
Did you look through the 2016s or just dump them? I have mixed feelings. On one side it would make for a boring hunt, on the other if you were to find an error it would be in great condition and there would be a possibility that you would get multiples of the same error. I search about half the new coins I come across but I don't like MWR dimes and nickels as they are more apparent when you dump them and right now there are just oodles of 2016 ps in my area. I do nickels and dimes in small volume $100-300 a week while searching for halves. Keep up the good work and keep educating us. Great pics btw. I usually can't even see the errors. I search with +12 magnification.

 

[port ewen ace]

nice cracks on the '08 & '14. the "cuds" are die chips, still a nice save. to you for taking the time to turn 30 cents into about $10. those are worth a lot more than the elusive silvers, but dimes are so slippery and small, they can be a pain to search. got 3 boxes of 2016's last week, swapped 'em for old & dirty dimes. save the '09 P&D's only if they are pristine, they could sell at 10X face on Ebay, I get $1 for '09-P MS Jeffs

 

[WheatFromChaff]

nice cracks on the '08 & '14. the "cuds" are die chips, still a nice save. to you for taking the time to turn 30 cents into about $10. those are worth a lot more than the elusive silvers, but dimes are so slippery and small, they can be a pain to search. got 3 boxes of 2016's last week, swapped 'em for old & dirty dimes. save the '09 P&D's only if they are pristine, they could sell at 10X face on Ebay, I get $1 for '09-P MS Jeffs

Thanks for the correction, I foolishly skipped my homework before posting, and those are indeed die chips as opposed to cuds. Would you classify the 08 as a cud? Or just a die break? Or none of the above?

 

[WheatFromChaff]

Very educational. I throw back the errors like the 2015 and 2010 "greasers" . I assumed in the past that they were weak strikes or strange wear or something. Should I be saving them? I also stopped saving the 2015 and 2016 p with the distorted rim. At first glance they look double die but I think the die is just worn out. The cud and die crack are super cool and those are the errors I look for but with far less luck than yourself.
Did you look through the 2016s or just dump them? I have mixed feelings. On one side it would make for a boring hunt, on the other if you were to find an error it would be in great condition and there would be a possibility that you would get multiples of the same error. I search about half the new coins I come across but I don't like MWR dimes and nickels as they are more apparent when you dump them and right now there are just oodles of 2016 ps in my area. I do nickels and dimes in small volume $100-300 a week while searching for halves. Keep up the good work and keep educating us. Great pics btw. I usually can't even see the errors. I search with +12 magnification.

I think you're right to throw back the 15 and 10s that are weak strikes or struck through grease. I just pulled those out to make my hunt more interesting, and I only save them if they are especially noteworthy. With regard to the new 2016 coins, I had the same process, but ultimately decided it wasn't worth my time to look for anything more than clipped planchets or rim cuds, which I would be able to spot just by edge-checking. Most of the time I don't bother looking for errors that aren't apparent without the naked eye because it's time-consuming and the market for them is not as large. I pick out anything that looks suspicious and examine it with a 7x Hastings triplet.

 

[enamel7]

The term "cud" has nothing to do with size. A cud is when the outer part of the die breaks away.

 

[WheatFromChaff]

The term "cud" has nothing to do with size. A cud is when the outer part of the die breaks away.

Yes, I did some basic research and determined that die chips are within the field while cuds always form at the rim, which is the differentiating factor. Did I mistakenly mention size somewhere?

 

[enamel7]

Yes, I did some basic research and determined that die chips are within the field while cuds always form at the rim, which is the differentiating factor. Did I mistakenly mention size somewhere?

You mentioned a possible cud on the 08. That one appears to be a combination of struck through grease and worn die.

 

[WheatFromChaff]

You mentioned a possible cud on the 08. That one appears to be a combination of struck through grease and worn die.

Ahh, thank you! As you can tell, I'm still pretty green and had no idea how to classify that one.