1999 $1 and $2 Obverse Die Varieties

Hercules · October 11, 2016, 02:23:31 PM

Does anyone have any pictures of the two different obverse die varieties on the 1999 $1 and $2? I've heard lots of discussion about them online, but I've never been able to distinguish them for myself. Any help would be much appreciated, because I'd like to throw some of these coins back into the pond.

Fulvio · October 11, 2016, 02:27:51 PM

Three $1 sizes, not two.

Unicorn · October 11, 2016, 02:51:02 PM

Pretty sure this is Feathers' page which describes the variations.

http://www.thesandpit.net/index.php?option=1999dollar

Hercules · October 11, 2016, 04:03:53 PM

Quote from: 'Unicorn' pid='99802' dateline='1476159662'Pretty sure this is Feathers' page which describes the variations.

http://www.thesandpit.net/index.php?option=1999dollar

Thanks, Unicorn. Is there are similar page for the 1999 $2?

Mister T · October 11, 2016, 09:35:57 PM

I don't think there's a similar page for the $2 coin but the only way I could figure them was to save all the ones I found and then have close look when I had saved up a lot. The text far from rim is about 10% of the mintage.

Hercules · October 11, 2016, 10:09:07 PM

Quote from: 'Mister T' pid='99822' dateline='1476183957'I don't think there's a similar page for the $2 coin but the only way I could figure them was to save all the ones I found and then have close look when I had saved up a lot. The text far from rim is about 10% of the mintage.

Thanks, Mister T. I looked at six of them under the microscope this afternoon, but I felt like pulling my hair out, because they all looked identical. I'll take a look at the others to see what I find. I have almost 400 of them saved up, so I've got plenty to analyse, but 400 $2 coins are worth $800 in total, and I'd like to free up this money for other things. :winkextra:

Mister T · October 12, 2016, 09:01:43 PM

400 geez... I had maybe 50. It's hard because the 1999 $1 and $2 coins seem to be not so well struck in general and the rim is usually pretty rough but I just put one under a microscope and kept putting a different one next to it until there was one were the gap between the text and the rim was different.

Hercules · October 12, 2016, 11:33:00 PM

Quote from: 'Mister T' pid='99869' dateline='1476268303'400 geez... I had maybe 50. It's hard because the 1999 $1 and $2 coins seem to be not so well struck in general and the rim is usually pretty rough but I just put one under a microscope and kept putting a different one next to it until there was one were the gap between the text and the rim was different.

I reckon it would have been easier back when they were first released. They're just so heavily worn now that they all look the same!

eccentric · October 13, 2016, 09:32:44 AM

[attachment=3557][attachment=3556]

These are two of my coins. The coin with the text closer to the rim appears to have a sloping edge to the rim itself. Whether this is characteristic of the coins with the closer text or whether it the result of the minting process is uncertain. It is definitely the rim and not a shadow.

Nevol · October 13, 2016, 09:54:08 AM

Quote from: 'eccentric' pid='99885' dateline='1476313364'These are two of my coins. The coin with the text closer to the rim appears to have a sloping edge to the rim itself. Whether this is characteristic of the coins with the closer text or whether it the result of the minting process is uncertain. It is definitely the rim and not a shadow.

Are they $1 or $2 coins? The reason I ask is that I don't recall the $2 having different obverses, but there are a lot of things I don't recall. :angel:

eccentric · October 13, 2016, 10:19:49 AM

Sorry - should have mentioned that. They are $2 coins. However, the text being closer to the rim might just be a slightly off-centre strike and not a different die. I'll check my other coins and see if this is repeated anywhere.

[attachment=3558]
I have eight UNC 1999 $2. Six show the text further from the rim and two have closer text. This is the second example of the closer text that I have. You can see that it has the same rim configuration as the other closer text coin. As mentioned before - whether these are from a different die, or whether the variation is caused by the minting process is a moot point.

Fulvio · October 13, 2016, 05:11:05 PM

Quote from: 'eccentric' pid='99889' dateline='1476316189'might just be a slightly off-centre strike and not a different die.

Huh? How does that work? If it was off-centre, the rim would be thicker on one side, but the distance from the lettering to the rim would stay constant. Unless of course it was massively off-centre and there was no rim, but that would make it a valuable rarity. :angel:

eccentric · October 13, 2016, 05:53:22 PM

You're quite right. On examination, there is no rim differentiation. So either it is a weaker strike that hasn't pushed the metal out to properly form the rim, or it is a different die. I seem to recall someone (emu666?) mentioning this bevelled rim with regard to a possible weaker strike on another coin but can't remember which one.

Fulvio · October 13, 2016, 06:19:37 PM

Quote from: 'eccentric' pid='99903' dateline='1476343402'I seem to recall someone (emu666?) mentioning this bevelled rim with regard to a possible weaker strike on another coin but can't remember which one.

Its a discussion we've had a few times. With no definitive answer as I recall. These funny bevels are quite common with $1 coins. Notably 1984. And I really wish I knew what caused them, because I reckon they SHOULD be collectible.

Mister T · October 13, 2016, 09:19:13 PM

Quote from: 'eccentric' pid='99885' dateline='1476313364'These are two of my coins. The coin with the text closer to the rim appears to have a sloping edge to the rim itself. Whether this is characteristic of the coins with the closer text or whether it the result of the minting process is uncertain. It is definitely the rim and not a shadow.

Nice - none of mine look that good.
I think I measured the distance at multiple places around the rim to make sure it was really different.