You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features.
For more information on registration and an upgrade to Paid and Premium Memberships go to our Membership page and join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Needs some help, I am trying to compare some extra thickness on this 1984-D on the LIBERTY and Date. I hope the photos are clear enough. Labeled them Thick for the ones I think are thicker and normal to what I had as a "normal" coin.
But the "extra thickness" gets me. Not always sure but this one feels like it.
I think liberty is thick, about as thick as some of the listed ones. The date is about normal.
I do see a lot of 84s that are thick, they might not be doubled dies or not listable ones.
I think that we are placing to much value on the term "extra thickness" to accurately describe a doubled die. If a design element has extra thickness in all quadrants, it is more than likely not a doubled die but a worn die. If a design element has extra thickness in one direction (or in some rare cases two directions), then it may very well be a doubled die. So, to further expand the term extra thickness, it should have the adjective "distorted" attached, or "distorted extra thickness". This term will suffice to accurately describe what is seen on a design element to qualify it as a possible doubled die.
Comment