1911-D RPM#3 and RPM#6

[eaxtellcoin]

No I agree Will. But here is the problem. The VV coin is LDS/LDS. So did we change a REV die somewhere before stage "C"? The examples of #6 all appear to be EDS-EMDS- OBV / LDS REV, so the #3 REV die would have had to be changed for the plate coin not to show the Die crack.

[kloccwork419]

They line up exactly. Just made this to show you. Its Dans pic and the "RPM-6" on VV. The pic on VV RPM-6 is well circulated

https://vimeo.com/420772281

[WaterSport]

Jason, can you do the video overlay with the 2 Trueview pics???

Bob

[stoneman227]

One more thing to add from me. Here is a photo I believe was taken prior (possibly considerably so) to the photos on Variety Vista. It has 2 things which indicate it may be of Paul's original coin. A small carbon spot above the mint mark, and a small stain under the 9. Both of these look to be present on careful examination of the RPM-003 photo on Variety Vista. Additional spots and maybe even a lamination issue seem to have been gained over time.

Dan


[ATTACH=CONFIG]151045[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]151046[/ATTACH]

Dan
Many thanks for this post as I believe it answers a couple of questions.
I created a video overlay of the photos you posted and one from Variety Vista.
I matched up the bottoms of the 1's in the date. The overlay shows how severely tilted the VV photo is and where the carbon spots match up to support the thought that this is the same coin.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/7964616@N02/49916058478/in/dateposted-public/

Even more , the photo you posted show a few die scratches from the top of the mintmark headed north. These can be seen on the Variety Vista photo. Here is a composite showing this.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/7964616@N02/49916830957/in/dateposted-public/

Same die. Same coin.
Dan,
You also posted pics of your coin. The numbers look more pronounced on your coin than the VV example.
My theory is #3 and #6 are the same die but what VV calls #3 is a later die state with the damaged reverse die switched out with a possible used but serviceable replacement.
John

[kloccwork419]

Thanks John. I tried telling them that its an angled pic. Cant do an overlay comparing a straight shot with the one on VV, itll never line up. I think thats what Wiles is doing when attributing this coin. If hes comparing to the pictures, it wont match

Video posted earlier: https://vimeo.com/420772281

Was asked for these below, used a free program. Moved the picture up so the water mark doesnt cover anything.
Date overlay: https://vimeo.com/420772294
Crack overlay: https://vimeo.com/420773014

The nice, more red coin is graded PCGS RPM-3. The 2nd ,also graded PCGS without attribution, was sent to Wiles and is the coin listed as RPM-6 stage C

[eaxtellcoin]

John,
You beat me to the punch. The only way this could be the same OBV die is. My stage "B" Coneca is an MDS like Dr. Wiles states - the coin appears EMDS OBV - , the next Die state "C" has the die cracks forming a cross in the right wheat, we then have a little later die state with a die crack developed on the left wheat. This IS the first year of production for this Die. I would think the Technicians may inspect the dies a little more frequently in Denver since this is the Debut year. They noticed the cracks or the die failed from the die pull and they replaced the die with another in service worn REV die that was not cracked. Your answer was exactly what I think also happened.
Eric

This is the only way the die could be the same OBV. Here is my #6 Stage B Coneca coin

[WaterSport]

My last comments. The first year for Cents in Denver was as you said, 1911. I believe the technicians had a heck of a problem adjusting the strike and broke what to me (- after looking at untold 1911 D cents) numerous Obverse and Reverse dies. Other than 1922, I do not know of a another year that has as many die cracks and 1922 was over use more than any other reason. So your observation makes perfectly good sense because it had happened before on many other known variety cents.

When I had my discussion with Dr. Wiles. He insisted the examples of RPM 3 he had seen had no die cracks. I had no problem with that statement because as we all know new dies should not have die cracks. But he was not hearing what I was trying to say that later die states do have die cracks so maybe what he saw was VEDS examples; but that did not make the coin a whole different RPM. As always, UNC EDS examples are needed for study. Let's hope one of us finds the unicorn. I applaud Erics efforts and to bring this subject up again. It's worth getting right. And I can not think of a better forum to host the discussion.

Bob

[kloccwork419]

Wouldnt be a problem if VV never listed an RPM-6. It's RPM-3. He made a new listing because he dont have the RPM-3 that's listed and the pictures are angled up. You can send him an RPM-3 and it will never line up. Pictures of the original coin was posted by Dan. If all Wiles has to compare is a picture he has listed, nothing will line up.

[WheatsRATreat]

It's plausible that the reverse die was replaced early in production. A similar situation occurred with the 1924-s/s.

[willbrooks]

This is fantastic. I'm so happy this forum is back to also discussing deeper things. Thanks everyone.

[centMD]

I could not agree more with Will! It's great to see a vibrant discussion with input from so many knowledgeable people here on the forum. I'm glad to see everyone contributing information, photos, overlays, and expert opinions! I dreaded seeing this thread started initially, but now I'm glad that it was.

Dan

[willbrooks]

Also check out this coin on PCGS. https://www.pcgs.com/cert/30926541

]

Bob, do you think dbemike is aware that his "normal" 1911D MS63 is actually an FS-503?

[WaterSport]

Bob, do you think dbemike is aware that his "normal" 1911D MS63 is actually an FS-503?

Oh He knows...

Bob

[willbrooks]

One more thing to add from me. Here is a photo I believe was taken prior (possibly considerably so) to the photos on Variety Vista. It has 2 things which indicate it may be of Paul's original coin. A small carbon spot above the mint mark, and a small stain under the 9. Both of these look to be present on careful examination of the RPM-003 photo on Variety Vista. Additional spots and maybe even a lamination issue seem to have been gained over time.

Dan

[ATTACH=CONFIG]151045[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]151046[/ATTACH]

To further advance the likelihood that this is the same coin, the hit on the curve just above center appears identical.

[willbrooks]

I once did a study on how the angle of a coin in relation to the film/sensor plane would affect the visual relationship of the date and the mintmark. The photos of 1911-D rpm#3 on VV were what I had in mind.
These are three identical composite illustrations of the same coin. The only difference is where I placed a horizontal line to show how the angle of the coin in relation to the sensor visually changes the location of the mintmark.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]151027[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]151028[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]151039[/ATTACH]

John

I missed this post the first time. That's awesome work, John. Thanks for sharing it.