1963 penny with wavy exergue

[terrysoldpennies 691]

I found this the other day. It seems to be scarce-ish  about 1 in 50 , and as  far as I know unlisted   Terry

[terrysoldpennies 691]

[secret santa 2,013]

Nice one Terry - it's good to have someone who keeps finding these new variants for us to go searching for.

[jelida 1,196]

That's a weird one, Terry, I wonder how that arose. No other differences to be seen? 

Jerry

[terrysoldpennies 691]

7 minutes ago, jelida said:

That's a weird one, Terry, I wonder how that arose. No other differences to be seen? 

Jerry

Its strange, as I can't find it on any of the other sixties pennies , and to be on such a modern coin.   Terry

[IanB 175]

Looks like the ends of the 9,6 & 3 on the wavy exergue are rounded. The straighter version are pointed.

[terrysoldpennies 691]

5 minutes ago, IanB said:

Looks like the ends of the 9,6 & 3 on the wavy exergue are rounded. The straighter version are pointed.

Well spotted Ian , both were done on the same scanner , so it cant be a difference in the shadow cast by the digits.   Terry

[Nordle11 564]

Well spotted Terry 

[jelida 1,196]

I have been through my curry container of 52 1963 pennies this morning, and only found one with an exergue as wavy as Terrys. However there were four more with 'waviness' distinctly greater than the norm, but less than Terry's one. I wonder whether this appearance is due to differing striking pressure, which might also fit in with the less sharp digit tops, perhaps with a degree of metal migration into the high relief shoulder region of Elizabeth's portrait on the obverse? The concavities of the exergue on mine do seem to be associated with some loss of definition of the edge. I dont really see it as a re-engraved die, but what do others think? 

Jerry

[terrysoldpennies 691]

1 hour ago, jelida said:

I have been through my curry container of 52 1963 pennies this morning, and only found one with an exergue as wavy as Terrys. However there were four more with 'waviness' distinctly greater than the norm, but less than Terry's one. I wonder whether this appearance is due to differing striking pressure, which might also fit in with the less sharp digit tops, perhaps with a degree of metal migration into the high relief shoulder region of Elizabeth's portrait on the obverse? The concavities of the exergue on mine do seem to be associated with some loss of definition of the edge. I dont really see it as a re-engraved die, but what do others think? 

Jerry

Jerry ,I have had a good close look at the Exergue on the wavy type with the magnifying glass , and there are minute scratches across the whole width of Exergue, suggesting that as on the missing sea types, this area of the top of the die has been rubbed with some kind of abrasive , and this would mean that the britanniar area would be higher ,and press down with greater force . with the excess of metal forced towards the digits in the exergue. I think this pressure would be less where some of the metal could move into the numbers , but on the open flat part of the exergue it would squash downwards, resulting in a wavy line .    I think ????      Terry

[jacinbox 36]

2 hours ago, jelida said:

perhaps with a degree of metal migration into the high relief shoulder region of Elizabeth's portrait on the obverse?

I would like to think so. The 1861 pennies with a slightly higher 1 in date have concave grooves on the area above the date. Both the 1860 and 1861 pennies with re-entered colon dots after the trailing D of F : D have a small bulge on the linear circle next to the :

[scott 129]

would this not be the flow of metal from the striking as well, are the numbers slightly thicker?

[IanB 175]

For the metal to flow, would that not mean that it had a space to flow into? 

The steel of the die being considerable harder than the bronze of the coin would trap the stamping in the shape of the die. 

For the metal to flow and keep its form albeit in a wavy appearance then the pressure of the metal when being stamped would need to be stronger than the hardened steel, pushing the die into a new shape.

is that possible?

Also the waves above the exergue look to me like they have not distorted, which they probably would do if the exergue flowed.

The wavy exergue looks bright, I do not know if this is the lighting when being photographed or a newly cut die being made to fit slightly thicker numbers?

[jelida 1,196]

Metal flow issues are all part and parcel of striking a coin, and strange effects do occur with some die combinations, take 'ghosting' on the earlier George V pennies, for example, an issue that took the mint years to resolve. Differing die striking pressure and therefore 'depth' of strike would also cause different patterns of flow and degrees of die filling. Under the high powered microscope this does not look like a sharp, re-engraved edge change to me. And the digits do not actually seem larger, though if they had been, the date digits could easily have been inserted a fraction of a millimeter lower in the exergue when preparing a working die from the master without the need to re-engrave the die. We  would really need an opinion from an expert at the mint to clarify what might have happened here.

Jerry

[jelida 1,196]

1 hour ago, IanB said:

For the metal to flow, would that not mean that it had a space to flow into? 

The steel of the die being considerable harder than the bronze of the coin would trap the stamping in the shape of the die. 

For the metal to flow and keep its form albeit in a wavy appearance then the pressure of the metal when being stamped would need to be stronger than the hardened steel, pushing the die into a new shape.

is that possible?

Also the waves above the exergue look to me like they have not distorted, which they probably would do if the exergue flowed.

The wavy exergue looks bright, I do not know if this is the lighting when being photographed or a newly cut die being made to fit slightly thicker numbers?

The alloy of the planchet 'flows' into the die under pressure of striking, and sometimes the high relief of one side draws more metal than the other side, weakening the strike on that side. In this case I suspect that the alloy has not 'flowed' fully into the die along the exergue, a slight differential being due to some alloy 'flowing' into the date digits causing even less fill locally and giving the wavy appearance. The digits might have appeared sharper and narrower ( ie greater depth, with the slight tapering of the section becoming manifest ) had the die been fully filled. The finding of coins of intermediate 'waviness' might support this, if the appearance is due to to a (variably) reduced striking pressure.

Possibly.

Jerry

[scott 129]

well it wasn't the Metal change, that was 1961.

[scott 129]

so no edit button.. but yea had a look at some at the dealers, and found possible examples in 1965 66 and 67 as well.

[jelida 1,196]

If it is a striking issue, it will probably be found with other dates. I will check more of mine.

Jerry

[jelida 1,196]

Found one in 38 1964 pennies, but none among 39 1965's .

[scott 129]

to the eye its barely noticeable I have to angle it to see the tell tale bumps.

1967 it seems to be rarest as well.

 

[PWA 1967 1,841]

I dont have any to look through but if anyone has a spare one please PM me.

Pete.

[terrysoldpennies 691]

On ‎24‎/‎07‎/‎2016 at 6:06 PM, terrysoldpennies said:

I found this the other day. It seems to be scarce-ish  about 1 in 50 , and as  far as I know unlisted   Terry

I was just taking another look at my 1963 wavy exergue , and have noticed something overlooked at the time , because we were all to distracted looking hard at the wavy exergue. The 9 has a squared off chisel like end to its tail, and also that the circular part of the 9 is squared off at the bottom.  A second pic in different light shown below . has anyone else got another one with this feature on it.     Terry

[terrysoldpennies 691]

6 hours ago, terrysoldpennies said:

I was just taking another look at my 1963 wavy exergue , and have noticed something overlooked at the time , because we were all to distracted looking hard at the wavy exergue. The 9 has a squared off chisel like end to its tail, and also that the circular part of the 9 is squared off at the bottom.  A second pic in different light shown below . has anyone else got another one with this feature on it.     Terry

I wonder if the distortion of the digits were caused by the same problem in the manufacturing process as that which caused the wavy exergue.     Terry

[Rob 3,000]

I think it is a function of metal flow when struck. If you look at the 'straight' exergue it also shows slight deviation at the same points, as do all bar one 1960s penny from a dozen or so in front of me. Not a variety IMO, just an accentuated feature on the coin above.