Morgan mint mark error how common is that ??

[Deepdiger60]

Hey all while looking at a few old Morgans here i have a 1882 S with a O over the S that is the first time i have seen a mint mark error on a Morgan is that a common thing ? its clear as day i have a few photos Thanks for any help Jim

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[Eddie Lomax]

It's not that plain to me, but the redbook does list an 1882 O over S. There is no mintage figure given, but it's worth twice as much as a regular O or S. VF-$45.00.

 

[Deepdiger60]

It's not that plain to me, but the redbook does list an 1882 O over S. There is no mintage figure given, but it's worth twice as much as a regular O or S. VF-$45.00.

Thanks for that reminder i have the 2011 redbook but keep forgetting i have it lol ill check that out Thanks Eddie

 

[Bigcypresshunter]

I have an O over S Morgan if I get a chance Ill dig it out and take a pic to compare.

 

[NHBandit]

I've been a coin collector for many years and while I'm no expert I have looked at alot of coins. What I'm seeing apears to be post mint damage. It looks like something struck the "O" and damaged it causing the left side of it to look a little bit like an S. I do see the part inside the O that is the same as pictures I looked at of a genuine O over S but the line across the center of the left side does not appear on genuine coins. It may be the real deal but with damage also. Just my opinion.

 

[l.cutler]

The O over S is a die variety, not an error. Your mintmark definitely has post mint damage, hard to tell for sure from the picture if it is the O over S.

 

[DialM]

How would an O over S mint error even occur?

 

[tr snyper]

l.cutler said it best. The O over the S is a die variety and not an error. If you look close on the "S" Morgans and the "O" Morgans you will notice that the "O's" are wider then the "S's". That coin shows the wide "O" mint mark. On the "O" over "S" the "S" die was re-cut into an "O" and the die cutter followed the outline of the "S" mintmark. On the true "O" over "S" the "O" is slightly more oblonged. This coin has more of a circular "O" mintmark that has been damaged pretty bad. The marks on the O are more recent as you don't see the same patina in the cut as you do the rest of the coin. The damage was recently done at that spot. Was it ground dug?

In the past people attempted to peen over the S mintmark on the 1916 Merc into a D. Then they would artifically age it to hide the hammered marks. Even though under slight magnification it looked authentic, the "width" of the D was to skinny.

You can always send it in to have it certified. But for arguements sake in the condition that it is in would it pay off to pay the fee on a coin that would only differ in value of $20.00 - $30.00 Only to come back a New Orleans mink mark and not the San Fran the O/S was cut from?

I know I'm kind of a new guy to this forum and haven't posted for a while from moving into a new home. But I "do" have 30 years of detecting under my belt with some unbelieveable finds to show for it. I have collected and graded coins for even longer then I've hunted. I started out with a Whites 4db!!! So please don't take offense to my reply. I'm only offering experience. And when I learn to post I'll show some of what "I've" dug here in New Jersey.
Steve

 

[NHBandit]

l.cutler said it best. The O over the S is a die variety and not an error. If you look close on the "S" Morgans and the "O" Morgans you will notice that the "O's" are wider then the "S's". That coin shows the wide "O" mint mark. On the "O" over "S" the "S" die was re-cut into an "O" and the die cutter followed the outline of the "S" mintmark. On the true "O" over "S" the "O" is slightly more oblonged. This coin has more of a circular "O" mintmark that has been damaged pretty bad. The marks on the O are more recent as you don't see the same patina in the cut as you do the rest of the coin. The damage was recently done at that spot. Was it ground dug?

In the past people attempted to peen over the S mintmark on the 1916 Merc into a D. Then they would artifically age it to hide the hammered marks. Even though under slight magnification it looked authentic, the "width" of the D was to skinny.

You can always send it in to have it certified. But for arguements sake in the condition that it is in would it pay off to pay the fee on a coin that would only differ in value of $20.00 - $30.00 Only to come back a New Orleans mink mark and not the San Fran the O/S was cut from?

I know I'm kind of a new guy to this forum and haven't posted for a while from moving into a new home. But I "do" have 30 years of detecting under my belt with some unbelieveable finds to show for it. I have collected and graded coins for even longer then I've hunted. I started out with a Whites 4db!!! So please don't take offense to my reply. I'm only offering experience. And when I learn to post I'll show some of what "I've" dug here in New Jersey.
Steve

Thanks for giving an informed opinion. I agree completely. Another thing I noticed while looking at pictures of a genuine O over S was the slight remains of the "S" seems visible in the very center of the open part of the "O" I do believe I see that on this coin which leads me to believe it is of that variety but the damage would tend to kill any added value at least for me.