Would you consider this md? It's only on the year.
Printable View
Would you consider this md? It's only on the year.
What I'm seeing on the date of your 1955 looks like a classic example of the 1955 Poor Man's Doubled Die. Here is the info from the Glossary about Die Deterioration Doubling and there's a pic of the 1955 Poor Man's example.
The photo shows up better if you click on this link http://www.lincolncentforum.com/terminology-list-d/ and scroll down to Die Deterioration Doubling and click on the pic of the 1955.
Die Deterioration Doubling: A circumstance that occurs from die deterioration whereby the devices show a duplicate image on a coin. As metal must flow into the recessed areas of the die during the strike to form the devices on a coin, the edges and corners of the design elements on the die begin to wear. Eventually, this wear shows as a doubled image on the coins they strike. On Lincoln cents, the date and mint mark are often the first to show this doubling, since these devices are in the middle of a field with no other counter-relief to aid metal flow. Die deterioration doubling usually exhibits on the rim side of the devices, as in the example below. The 1955 “Poor Man’s Doubled Die” is NOT a doubled die at all, rather it is an example of die deterioration doubling. Dies in this time period were grossly “overused” resulting in many coins showing this common form of doubling. Die deterioration doubling is not generally considered collectible. Photo of the 1955 “poor man’s doubled die” is courtesy of forum member dinkyblue. Please also see Jason Cuvelier’s excellent tutorial on the subject Here.
http://www.lincolncentforum.com/wp-c...g2-150x150.jpghttp://www.lincolncentforum.com/wp-c...g1-150x150.jpghttp://www.lincolncentforum.com/wp-c...p_-150x150.jpg
Quote:
Originally Posted by VAB2013
Thank you viv for the link and help. I've heard of one but never seen it. Off topic got a 1909 s on eBay, spur of the moment auction. Should of hit up Ed since him and I talked about coins prior. Think 125 was too much? Lol guess that is a question for off topic discussions!
[QUOTE=VAB2013;361403]What I'm seeing on the date of your 1955 looks like a classic example of the 1955 Poor Man's Doubled Die. Here is the info from the Glossary about Die Deterioration Doubling and there's a pic of the 1955 Poor Man's example.
The photo shows up better if you click on this link http://www.lincolncentforum.com/terminology-list-d/ and scroll down to Die Deterioration Doubling and click on the pic of the 1955.
Die Deterioration Doubling: A circumstance that occurs from die deterioration whereby the devices show a duplicate image on a coin. As metal must flow into the recessed areas of the die during the strike to form the devices on a coin, the edges and corners of the design elements on the die begin to wear. Eventually, this wear shows as a doubled image on the coins they strike. On Lincoln cents, the date and mint mark are often the first to show this doubling, since these devices are in the middle of a field with no other counter-relief to aid metal flow. Die deterioration doubling usually exhibits on the rim side of the devices, as in the example below. The 1955 “Poor Man’s Doubled Die” is NOT a doubled die at all, rather it is an example of die deterioration doubling. Dies in this time period were grossly “overused” resulting in many coins showing this common form of doubling. Die deterioration doubling is not generally considered collectible. Photo of the 1955 “poor man’s doubled die” is courtesy of forum member dinkyblue. Please also see Jason Cuvelier’s excellent tutorial on the subject Here.
http://www.lincolncentforum.com/wp-c...g2-150x150.jpghttp://www.lincolncentforum.com/wp-c...g1-150x150.jpghttp://www.lincolncentforum.com/wp-c...p_-150x150.jpg[/QUOTE
Agree on the deterioration doubling, I hate the name "poor mans doubled die" but we are stuck with it, it's been in so many books and articles. Just wish they never used "doubled die" since it's not one!
Might start another thread for the 09-S. It might need a thread!
That 09-S, if it's as nice as it looks it's probably a pretty good fit for a nice set. I'd rather pay $125 for that coin than the $40-70 that I see ugly low grades sell for. Looks like a nice coin.
You need to post a close up of the S. I'm wondering if it could be RPM-2?
Maybe get a close pic that includes enough of the date and if it looks like it maybe Jim can ovelay it to verify. :)
I see something in the right area, the S is slightly rotated, the position looks kinda right so I'm wondering if it could possibly be the variety.
You are welcome Jdubbs! Like Ed said, it's best to start a new thread for a different coin - otherwise things get confusing. You are welcome to go ahead and start a new thread for your 1909S or if you want to, we can ask Jim to move that part and start a new one for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jdubbs
Nice that the 09-S turned out to be the S over horizontal RPM-2!
Here is some additional info from Error Ref on DDD... You will see some pretty wild DDD as you search and it does get worse than the pics we see... The mint used some of the dies well beyond what they should have!!!