In regards to the 1836 O-105, I too have been puzzled by the corrugations. Souders makes no mention of it, but Overton says that it is not as visible on early die states, and gets progressively worse. Obviously, it is not a planchet defect since it is present on every coin struck by the die. For readers unfamiliar with what we are talking about, please see my example shown below, graded NGC EF-40. The area in question is at the bottom of the reverse, between the leaves and the 50 C. Perhaps this might be an interesting variety to study at a future JRCS meet?
(editor's note: click on the image to enlarge it)
Greg Barnett wrote:
In response to Dick's question about the corrugated marks on Reverse D of 1836: I have no idea what caused these marks, but I do have a further question.
Has anyone seen an O-121 with these marks, or an O-105 without them? I have numerous examples of the O-105, all with the marks, but my O-121 does not have them, and I have not seen an image
of one that does. I suspect that they might have been removed by lapping prior to the striking of O-121's. (Granted there are not many examples of the O-121 to look at for reference.) Overton states that EARLY states of the die show little or no evidence of the rays - but I believe he meant LATE states ?? The only other example of similar marks that I have seen is on the 1835 O-108. These are referenced by Overton as "short vertical rays".
None of my O-118's have the corrugation marks. The only examples I have from 1836 are on the O-105.
thx, Greg Barnett
Steven Kawalec wrote: