Rare 1993 Quarter Errors (List & Pictures)
Among 1993 quarter errors, an aluminum feeder fragment received five quarter strikes and sold for $1,495 at the 2009 Central States Heritage auction. It was the struck object itself, rather than a normal quarter with an attachment.
Supplied estimates span $5–$5,000 across the groups below. Start with the object’s shape and edge, then examine its metal, repeated designs, and front-to-back alignment.
| Visible clue | Possible type | Estimated value |
|---|---|---|
| Irregular aluminum with quarter designs | Feeder fragment struck five times | $1,000–$5,000 |
| Two matching contact edges | Chain-strike pair | $300–$3,000 for both |
| Gap or oval outline | Incomplete blank | $15–$500 |
| Stepped edge and depression | Partial collar with indent | $50–$1,000 |
| Copper-colored face | Missing clad layer | $50–$800 |
| Design missing beside bare metal | Off-center strike | $50–$1,500 |
| Several large impressions | Double or triple strike | $100–$2,500 |
| Fine repeated contours | Reported doubled die | $5–$250, if identified |
| Eagle turned after a controlled flip | Rotated die | $10–$300 |
1. 1993 Quarter Quarter Impressions on Irregular Aluminum: Five-Struck Feeder Fragment Error
The documented object is part of a feeding mechanism that entered the striking area and received five blows from quarter dies. Its irregular aluminum shape never began as a normal quarter blank.
It was certified PCGS MS64 and documented as a 1993 feeder-finger tip. A feeder finger helps move blanks through the press, but the supplied account does not establish this fragment’s mint.
How to Identify
Preserve the original outline, bends, and thickness without pressing the metal flat or trimming its edges. Normal quarter diameter and weight are not the right starting specifications for a machine fragment.
Trace recognizable quarter letters or artwork into each surviving impression. Scratches and bends must remain distinct from the repeated struck designs.
Photograph both faces, the side profile, and any date area before comparing with the documented object. The certified count of five strikes belongs to this fragment and cannot be transferred to every similar-looking scrap.
What It’s Worth
$1,000–$5,000 is the supplied estimate for an authenticated comparable fragment. Recognizable designs, preservation, and a clear repeated-strike arrangement influence its appeal.
Mint Error News documents the five-strike feeder tip, which brought $1,495 at the 2009 Central States Heritage auction. That price bought the complete piece rather than each impression separately.
2. 1993 Quarter Straightened Edges on Two Related Coins: Chain-Strike Pair Error
Two neighboring blanks can restrict one another’s sideways expansion during striking. Their contact may leave straightened edges that record the relationship between the coins.
A 1993 pair was cataloged as ANACS MS64. This chain strike differs from a blank overlapping another deeply enough to create a broad indent in a face.
How to Identify
Compare full photographs of the two coins side by side, without forcing a physical fit. The contact boundaries and adjacent metal flow should support the same shared event.
Similar dates or straight-edge lengths do not prove that the pair belongs together. Inspect for filing and flattened finished detail that could have created matching-looking sides afterward.
Keep both outlines and certification descriptions with the comparison. A specialist should be able to explain how the boundaries formed together rather than merely observe that they look alike.
What It’s Worth
$300–$3,000 is the supplied estimate for both coins in an authenticated matching pair. It is not a per-quarter range.
The recorded MS64 condition describes unworn preservation with some marks, but no completed pair price is supplied. A complete demonstrable relationship is more informative than two unrelated flat-sided coins.
3. 1993 Quarter Curved Gaps, Straight Ends, or an Oval Outline: Incomplete Blanks Error
Denver examples include a 7% curved clip, a 15% double clip, a 15% straight-end clip, and an oval blank. The design was struck onto metal that already had an incomplete or unusual outline.
The oval example shortens outer detail from LIBERTY toward four o’clock. The 7% curved clip received a Details grade, indicating a condition problem separate from its blank error.
How to Identify
Inspect the boundary where each gap meets the struck rim. Fresh file lines, burrs, or letters sliced through afterward suggest later cutting instead of original blank formation.
Opposite-rim weakness can support a curved clip without settling the question alone. Examine both openings of the double clip separately, remembering that the stated 15% applies to the whole coin.
Use a full-outline photograph for the oval specimen rather than treating it as a single curved bite. Match its shortened LIBERTY-to-four-o’clock region with the original strike.
What It’s Worth
$15–$500 is the supplied estimate across genuine clipped and oval examples. Gap size, remaining identity, and preservation all matter.
The straight-end clip appeared in a three-coin catalog group, so a group price would not establish its individual selling price. The curved clip’s Details condition also prevents treating it as equivalent to a clean unworn coin with the same percentage missing.
4. 1993 Quarter A Stepped Edge Alongside a Hollow: Partial Collar with Indent Error
The documented Philadelphia quarter in ANACS MS63 combines two physical features: a partial-collar edge and an indent. They belong to one coin and need different viewing angles.
The collar normally restrains width and forms edge grooves; partial enclosure allows one band to spread farther than another. An overlapping blank can separately block part of the strike and leave the hollow called an indent.
How to Identify
Use a side view to follow the transition from the grooved confined band into the wider metal. A single dent or rolled edge should not be mistaken for the original step.
Examine the hollow’s boundary and nearby design for a relationship consistent with an overlapping blank during striking. A later tool impact may instead push metal around a depression cut into finished artwork.
Keep the edge and face views tied to the same specimen. The source does not locate the indent on a particular face, so its position must come from the actual coin.
What It’s Worth
$50–$1,000 is the supplied estimate for the authenticated combination. Clarity of the step and indent, together with condition, determines the useful comparison.
No completed price is supplied for the ANACS MS63 example. Adding maximum estimates for two separate error types would overstate the evidence for this one coin.
5. 1993 Quarter Copper Across a Face: Missing Outer Clad Layer Error
A normal quarter has pale outer layers bonded to a copper center. A missing outer layer can expose that copper across a face, unlike the normal copper already visible along the edge.
A documented 1993-D example was certified ANACS MS62 Red. Its description does not specify which face lost the layer, so that detail should not be guessed.
How to Identify
For a loose candidate, compare weight with the normal 5.67 grams. Layer loss should reduce weight, but grinding or chemical damage may do so too.
Inspect the edge beside the copper-colored face and compare it with the intact side. Under neutral light, look for original struck texture across the exposed copper instead of broad scraping or an added coating.
Photograph both faces and the layer boundary together. Brown color alone cannot distinguish genuine layer loss from staining or plating.
What It’s Worth
$50–$800 is the supplied estimate for authenticated examples, depending on loss, design preservation, and surface condition. This prices the surviving coin, not a detached sheet of metal.
The ANACS MS62 Red 1993-D quarter sold for $156 on November 6, 2020. MS62 indicates an unworn coin with noticeable marks, while Red describes its copper-colored appearance.
6. 1993 Quarter A Bare Crescent Beside a Shortened Picture: Off-Center Strike Error
A reported 1993 quarter in NGC MS63 was struck about 50% off-center. Its mint is not established by the supplied account.
The blank was misplaced between the dies, allowing part of the design to miss the metal. The percentage describes the strike’s displacement, not the removal of half the original disc.
How to Identify
Follow the outer letters to where the design runs beyond the blank, then locate untouched metal at the opposite side. Both faces should agree with the same misplaced disc.
A centered reverse behind a shifted portrait calls for another explanation, such as a misaligned die. Inspect bare-looking areas for file marks or ghost details left by removal of a completed design.
Record the readable year and any surviving mintmark without borrowing identity from another 1993 error. A complete outline photograph helps connect the strike boundary to the blank crescent.
What It’s Worth
$50–$1,500 is the supplied estimate for genuine dated 1993 off-center quarters. Large displacement with a readable date can be striking, though damage and lost identity can reduce appeal.
The reported approximately 50% NGC MS63 example supplies no verified selling price here. Percentage alone is not a formula for the coin’s value.
7. 1993 Quarter Two or Three Connected Groups of Design: Repeated Strikes Error
One 1993-P quarter received a centered strike followed by a second blow 10% off-center toward twelve o’clock. It was graded NGC AU58, indicating slight wear.
Other Philadelphia reports include a 60% off-center second strike, an NGC MS66 triple strike, and a separate ANACS MS63 double strike with an indent. Their movements and added features must remain attached to their own specimens.
How to Identify
Trace a large repeated letter into neighboring artwork so several details explain one additional impression. A flat shelf beside a single letter does not show that the entire coin received another blow.
The AU58 example’s upward 10% second strike is a useful specific comparison. Do not transfer that direction to the separate 60% example.
For a triple strike, look for evidence of three design sets while allowing later blows to obscure earlier details. On an indented double strike, examine the hollow separately without assigning it to a particular blow unless the overlap supports that sequence.
What It’s Worth
$100–$2,500 is the supplied estimate across authenticated double and triple strikes of these types. Readability of the extra designs and overall preservation both affect the comparison.
The 1993-P NGC AU58 coin with a 10% off-center second strike sold for $431.25 in January 2005. Its light wear did not prevent the two impressions from explaining the error.
8. 1993 Quarter Small Repeated Contours in the Same Design: Reported Doubled Die Error
A doubled die already carries repeated details before it strikes a blank. This differs from the larger shifted pictures produced by multiple blows to the coin.
The 1993 report requires an authenticated pattern, mint, and affected face. A thick letter or isolated second line does not establish those missing parts of the attribution.
How to Identify
Photograph the clearest suspected detail under two lighting directions and compare its top and endpoints with the main shape. Then inspect neighboring details for a consistent repeated pattern.
A flat ledge that reduces the original letter can indicate mechanical doubling during striking. Rounded extra contours need a match to an authenticated die pattern before a variety name is assigned.
Retain a full-face photograph with date and mintmark beside the close-up. A cropped letter alone does not identify which 1993 coin is being examined.
What It’s Worth
$5–$250 is the supplied conditional estimate for a professionally identified 1993 doubled-die variety. The upper portion requires clear repeated details that another collector can recognize.
No named authenticated pattern or completed sale is supplied here. Lighting, wear, and flat doubling can exaggerate a vague feature without supporting an error premium.
9. 1993 Quarter The Eagle Leaning After a Controlled Flip: Rotated Die Error
A turned die can change the angle between Washington and the eagle while leaving just one complete design on each face. The reported Philadelphia example has no established rotation measurement.
The relationship must be checked on the same coin. Separately rotating photographs can create a misleading display of what is actually normal alignment.
How to Identify
Hold Washington upright with the top at twelve o’clock, then flip the coin top to bottom around a horizontal axis. Avoid adding a sideways twist; a normal eagle should finish upright.
Repeat with an ordinary quarter as a control. If the candidate consistently leans, record its positions against fixed external reference marks without straightening the images afterward.
A coin moving within a holder can invalidate the test. Establish a repeatable relative angle before asking whether the departure exceeds ordinary production variation.
What It’s Worth
$10–$300 is the supplied estimate for confirmed rotations. Larger easily demonstrated turns generally offer more interest than small deviations.
The Philadelphia report provides neither a measured angle nor a completed price. Wear that obscures the eagle’s upright orientation can also make the identification less secure.
Conclusion
The 1993 evidence ranges from small reported die features to a five-strike aluminum machine fragment. Identify what object was struck, preserve its original boundaries, and use the complete arrangement of designs to explain the production event.
Keep combined errors on one coin and matching chain-strike pairs together when comparing values. Grades, percentages, face locations, and strike counts belong to their actual specimens rather than to every example with a similar-looking mark.
