1919 Micro S "Mysterious $5 in winged liberty dimes"

[Dearing]

Simpler question, in your pic with the 1919-S over another S mint Merc, what is the date on the other? Is it a later date like 44-45?

If that is the case then it's normal, the S on the 1919 is smaller than the one used on those.

From comparing the pics, yours is the normal MMS-002 and the bigger one you are comparing it to is an MMS-006 from 1944 or 1945. Is the bigger one in your pic a 1944 or 1945?

The left is a 45, the right is the 19 and the bottom is a 44... I've been studying the 1919 small and 45 micro on the links ya'll gave me and I did a couple of side by sides below... Doesn't mine look more like the micro 45 on the top serif how it runs up and down from the end of the upper curve? Or maybe that's from wear or something else?
1st pic mine & 45 micro
2nd pic mine & reg small 19
That's my last question, it will calm the questions in my head lol

[GrumpyEd]

In your pics the S looks more like the regular one for 19 based on the serifs but it has more wear.

I avoid thinking of new discoveries on things that are hard to see when my coin is a worn circ. It would be hard to nail it down on unc coins even comparing examples from the same date side by side. Looking at a circ is likely to be confusing plus if such a variety did exist then someone probably would have a high grade example to compare to so without it being known I wouldn't look.

The micro S is on 1945s, they had a different punch. There's no reason to expect the same thing to exist 26 years before they were using that punch only because they are both Mercs.

I think names used for some varieties add confusion because newer collectors assume a lot from the names. It's best to use numbers like say mintmark MMS-00X MMS-00Y were both used that year. My reasoning is saying "micro" makes new folks think anything small is that variety but size is relative to punching and wear, we really care about style. Whoever named the micro S probably fed off the term from it being used on micro o mintmarks.
Same with small dates 60P/D and 70S, they are different but nobody would ID them based on being smaller, it's a different style that matters not size. The hobby latches onto something like the 60 styles were called large and small so they used large and small again to describe the 70S but size is not at all the main thing to go by (and neither was "level").
And the worst of all silly names is that they also latched onto "wide AM" and "close AM" which made sense with 98-99-00 and 92 but then people started using those terms to label the varieties with different FGs like 1988 even though they all had the same AM. So some poor begginer will look for the 1988 with a wide AM because that was the name of the variety.

Sorry to ramble, my point is go by styles of things and ignore whatever the hobby named things. Don't search based on whatever the name implies a variety is, look up the styles on places that have better reference info/pics.

Perfect example of finding a normal 1988 cent because the AM is wide, yet all are wide and the variety is a different RDV that had nothing to do with AM but somehow the hobby latched onto a silly label.

example:

https://www.coincommunity.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=307978

[Dearing]

In your pics the S looks more like the regular one for 19 based on the serifs but it has more wear.

I avoid thinking of new discoveries on things that are hard to see when my coin is a worn circ. It would be hard to nail it down on unc coins even comparing examples from the same date side by side. Looking at a circ is likely to be confusing plus if such a variety did exist then someone probably would have a high grade example to compare to so without it being known I wouldn't look.

The micro S is on 1945s, they had a different punch. There's no reason to expect the same thing to exist 26 years before they were using that punch only because they are both Mercs.

I think names used for some varieties add confusion because newer collectors assume a lot from the names. It's best to use numbers like say mintmark MMS-00X MMS-00Y were both used that year. My reasoning is saying "micro" makes new folks think anything small is that variety but size is relative to punching and wear, we really care about style. Whoever named the micro S probably fed off the term from it being used on micro o mintmarks.
Same with small dates 60P/D and 70S, they are different but nobody would ID them based on being smaller, it's a different style that matters not size. The hobby latches onto something like the 60 styles were called large and small so they used large and small again to describe the 70S but size is not at all the main thing to go by (and neither was "level").
And the worst of all silly names is that they also latched onto "wide AM" and "close AM" which made sense with 98-99-00 and 92 but then people started using those terms to label the varieties with different FGs like 1988 even though they all had the same AM. So some poor begginer will look for the 1988 with a wide AM because that was the name of the variety.

Sorry to ramble, my point is go by styles of things and ignore whatever the hobby named things. Don't search based on whatever the name implies a variety is, look up the styles on places that have better reference info/pics.

Perfect example of finding a normal 1988 cent because the AM is wide, yet all are wide and the variety is a different RDV that had nothing to do with AM but somehow the hobby latched onto a silly label.

example:

https://www.coincommunity.com/forum/...OPIC_ID=307978

Oh ok, thank ya Ed, and I don't mind you rambling... the more you ramble the more I learn I'm always interested in knowledge filled ramblings lol

[jfines69]

Yes, it's working

Cool thanks!!!

[jfines69]

In your comparison of your 19s MM with the 45S micro you need to take into account that heavy circ wear... The outer edge of your coin is so heavily worn that half of the letters and other devices are gone... The remaining portions are basically flattened and I think that is what's causing the appearance to be similar to the Micro-S... Also if we compare the shape of your MM with MMS-005 they are very similar... Hope that helps a bit!!!