I can not find any info on whether the small date was minted in 1961. This recent find of mine appears to me that the 6 is small despite the gouge. Opinions are welcomed. Thanks.
Did some digging and did not find a small date but I could be wrong. Let the pros some in on this and tell you for sure. There is some major PSD on that coin though and I usually toss them when they are to that point though because of what I've been told on this forum. I think it was Ed, in very basic terms, if it cannot be identified or you cannot tell for sure, then does it really matter? Hey Roller and enamel!! I'm heading your direction and yes, I feel your pain...
It's damaged, the top of the 1 and 6 were sraped to the SW and it moved metal. It also made the digits look wider.
The reason it might not seem obvious is the toning and the area where the metal was sheered off doesn't show well but there are other damaged areas that show up well.
I have never heard of a large/small date on the 61s... However, to help you out, if you take a look at the differences of the large/small dates for the 1960 P,D and S LCs on the LCR (Lincoln Cent Resource) http://www.lincolncentresource.com/s...smalldate.html there is a large difference between the loops of the 9 and 6... On all 3 mints the loops tip small date 9 points more to the SE and the large date points closer to the ESE... On the loops tip of the small date 6 points more NW and the large date points more WNW... If there was a small/large date for 1961 yours would be large due to the direction of the loops tips... Hope that helps a little!!!
Jim
(A.K.A. Elmer Fudd) Be verwy verwy quiet... I'm hunting coins!!! Good Hunting!!!
Bookmarks