Error Kennedy 40% silver half dollars question

[fikys]

I went through my set of 160 40% silver half dollars with magnifying glass and seems like found 5 error ones. But I'm totally new to "error" coins. I need an opinion from professionals if these are real errors, how would you classify them and if it worth looking for them in 40% silver coins. It takes a lot of time to look for these errors that's why I would like to know if these errors really add anything to the coin cost? Thank you!

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A History of Mining on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska - Grab it through Amazon!

[Jeffro]

http://www.numismedia.com/coinguys/top50kenn.shtml

http://www.minterrornews.com/home.html

http://www.coingalaxy.com/coininfo/doubling.html

The third and fifth ones look most promising. The second one is after the mint damage, I'm pretty sure.

Third one is what is called a "cud". Some specialty collectors love these coins.

The fifth one certainly appears to be genuine doubling, but I can't find a reference for this one. May be you found the first one? New ones are being found all the time, so hang onto it!

The others could possibly be, but they look more like strike doubling to me. Not much added value if any, but interesting anyways.

I recommend the "Cherrypickers" Guide to rare die varieties, available at most any coin store.

Vol 1 covers half cents to nickels and has a great section on how to tell the various forms of doubling apart. Great for learning about what to look for.

Vol 2 covers half dimes to dollars, and even gold coins and commemeratives too.

Hope this helps!

 

[ivan salis]

the third one is easily seen as an error coin -- even to me but I'm no expert

 

[djui5]

Here is my opinion,
Coin 1, is this the same as coin 4?
Coin 2, looks like a strike through, thought a minor one. Not worth much really
Coin 3, cud error, as posted above.
Coin 4, this actually looks like a real double die, though I'm not positive. Might be worth a bit.
Coin 5, this one I'm about 99% positive is a mechanical double, which isn't worth anything.

 

[fikys]

Jeffro, djui5, and ivan salis, thank you for your opinions. Based on the consensus opinion only the coin no 3 seems to be a "real" error coin. djui5 coins 1 and 4 are different coins, one from 1965 and another one from 1968, but they do look very similar to me. Jeffro - thank you for very detailed post. I did read all the sites that you gave links for and I will try to find the book. I still don't understand if it worth looking for these errors if it is difficult to get a certain opinion about them. E.g. coin no. 5.

 

[Jeffro]

Well, no coin is for certain until it has been attributed, that is to say an example is out there that an expert has certifed as a known example. Once that happens, its easy to look for others that look the same.

The reason I think number five is one, is that it doesn't have the flat, shelflike appearance of a strike double- which is where the die has "shifted" slightly during striking. A true doubled die is one where the die itself has the double impression and they appear as more rounded images, usually splitting the letters like this-



Your pics number 1 and 4 look more like strike doubling, but what confuses me is the fact that stars do not have the same look to them. I'm no expert, by the way. One of those links I posted should be Ken Potters site. You may want to contact him about them for a more definate answer.

By the way, nice shots.

Also, number three- the cud- is easy.... a cud is a cud. No two ways about it. Pretty easy to spot that as a genuine error. And easy to get a concensus on.

Once you get the cherrypickers guide, you'll want to go back through your halves. You'll know what to look for this time, as they have pictures for each year so it will go much faster.

 

[djui5]

Ken is the man! He would know for sure

 

[Coinkid]

I have been studying error coins and double dies for over a year now and here's what i think:

1) Strike Doubling
2) Damage
3) Cud
4) Strike Doubling
5) Genuine Doubling- even though I don't know the date, I have the Cherrypicker's guide, and if I had to take a guess at the date I'd say 1967, DDR (FS-50-1967-801)...which is only worth $15 in MS-63.Of course, all of that is based on speculation, which means your coin could be worth less or much more.

 

[fikys]

5) Genuine Doubling- even though I don't know the date, I have the Cherrypicker's guide, and if I had to take a guess at the date I'd say 1967, DDR (FS-50-1967-801)...which is only worth $15 in MS-63.Of course, all of that is based on speculation, which means your coin could be worth less or much more.

It is actually 1966. Thanks you!

 

[Emperor Findus Cladius]

Would that 3rd coin be a cud or a die chip? I always thought cuds occured on the coin rim.

 

[Jeffro]

Good point- I had to go and look- LOL!

Got this from here- http://www.etcmmag.com/glossary.html

Cuds The cud error is caused by a broken die and results in an "unstruck" area on the coin.

Die Chips & Cracks Caused by dies which are deteriorating and are damaged.

Looks like they could be interchangeable, although you're right- generally ones near the rim are referred to as cuds.

I've always considered any broken away area as a cud though.

 

[djui5]

I've always considered any broken away area as a cud though.

Yeah, me too. Glad to know the difference