1921-S Morgan Vam-1S, Another Reverse?

[GregK360]

I have a 1921-S Morgan Vam-1S. My specimen has the obverse die break but not the reverse die gouges. There are also some slight differences on the file lines from the stock photo compared to mine. It may be from the quality of the stock picture or a second attempt to file the break. The heavier file lines are what stand out or do not match. There is no real consensus on the reverse since the VAM-1S and 1T may be different die states.

The following are the pics from my specimen. The Legend from TED STATES OF AMERICA is also slightly doubled. There are no scribbles. I also have more pictures than posted here. Any thoughts?

[Jodemyer]

@GregK360
It looks like they got quite a bit more serious with filing the gouge out like you said, I wonder how many times they filed it, checked the Morgans, filed it again and if they were successful removing it from the die.

[Mhomei]

Do you have the coin in hand?

[Albannach]

How does it not fit the description of the 1 s?

[GregK360]

Yes, I do have the coin in hand. It does fit the description of the VAM-1S obverse. There is no question about that. There is a question of the reverse. The reverse that I have is not pitted and does not have the gouges as shown in the LVA Plate Photos. That is why I have provided photos for the markers for this specimen. The obverse also appears to have different heavier file lines across the date as compared to the LVA Plate Photos.

Is it possible that there are two different reverses?

Is it possible that the obverse was filed, used for a time and filed again and the used again?

It's difficult to take photos that reveal everything. My cell phone took the lighter pics but slightly off in focus.

[GregK360]

Here is another picture of the date.

[GregK360]

A better date pic.

[vampicker]

Both of the questions you raised are possible and plausible. Before suggesting you send it in for further study, I'd like to see comments from a few of the people that specialize in this date.

[Mhomei]

Please provide a MM photo

[GregK360]

MM photo.

[Albannach]

I think my point got missed here.
Leroy saw nothing remarkable on th 1 s submission coin reverse so nothing to list.
The reverse pictured sure looks like listable features but…

Perhaps a split listing is needed but for now the 1 s is contingent on the obverse features.

If you can gather the coins it may be worth a look by management
Good luck

[GregK360]

I think what is getting lost in the conversation is that the VAM-1S and Vam-1T may share the same reverse for the die gouge in left wreath above N in ONE but in different die states and more research was needed as stated in the listings. I would agree a die gouge of that size list worthy but may not have been listed in the VAM-1S due to being listed for the VAM-1T. Discounting the the filing around the date of the 1S, the obverses between the 1S and 1T are different.

There is the possibility that the VAM-1S may also share a different reverse. That would be the question to ask and may require more research. I whish I had another 1S with the gouged reverse to compare and that is why I have posted here. Also have no idea how common or uncommon the 1S and 1T are.

[Albannach]

ANACS pop is one graded in 62...

and yes they could share a reverse or even be the same die pair (not variety). Providing that reverse pic is legit...trust me when i say, you need more coins.

Welcome to die study!

[vampicker]

Without examples to make a comparison, this is kinda stalled for now. @DHalladay might be able to help if he's got a raw example, but that might be a longshot. There's only one listed in the SSDC registry and the owner is an infrequent visitor here. It's probably a new die combination, but I'm not going to write a new listing based on 'probably'.

[DHalladay]

Without examples to make a comparison, this is kinda stalled for now. @DHalladay might be able to help if he's got a raw example, but that might be a longshot. There's only one listed in the SSDC registry and the owner is an infrequent visitor here. It's probably a new die combination, but I'm not going to write a new listing based on 'probably'.

Sorry, but I don't have one. I avoid 1921-S in general. The only time I get one is if it was an unintended part of a roll of 1921-Ps or Ds, which coincidentally happened 2 days ago.

[vampicker]

Thinking about this more and another alternative is to send it to @messydesk for photos and to note it is a possible new marriage. It might help build up the information we have.

[messydesk]

That might be the best course of action. I hesitate to catalog a new die marriage without conclusive evidence that it's warranted, but I can at least document what is being observed.

[vampicker]

My thoughts exactly, thanks John

[messydesk]

Looking at the coin now. The obverse crack looks the same as VAM 1S, and perhaps it received some additional polishing on the date at some point. The reverse has no trace of scribble scratches, so I can't match it to VAM 1T's reverse. It doesn't have the stuff shown on VAM 1S, but I'd sure like to poke that coin with a stick to rule out occluded gas. I'll add some pictures to the VAM 1S page later this weekend and call this VAM 1S for now, but it does warrant keeping an eye out for specimens of both VAM 1S and 1T for future comparison.

[GregK360]

I think I just may have solved the reverse on my 1S coin. Decided to check the full coin views on all the 1921-S VAMs and confident that the reverse paired with my 1S is the reverse from the VAM-1DJ. It appears to have same scratch between upper and middle clusters of olive leaves on branch. When looking at the full coin view of the reverse of the 1DJ, it has that same gouge from the denticles above the right wing. The die crack on the 1DJ from ES of STATES to O of OF also matches the reverse on my 1S coin. Thoughts??