1964-D LMC - Doubling At Throat?

This is NOT Machine Doubling. You cannot write off any sort of doubling that's not a doubled die to Machine Doubling. It's just not that simple.

This particular coin shows a form of doubling that is not widely understood, the only thing I know about it is that it is very common. It is not a doubled die, and is not collectible as a doubled die, but this form of anomaly exists in abundance from 1956-1965, and is believed to be a form of hand-tooling on the hub to strengthen details.

One thing I can say for sure is that this doesn't have ANYTHING to do with the strike of the coin, all of the coins struck by this die show the same anomaly. That means it is NOT Machine Doubling.

It actually doesn't look like Machine Doubling at all. It is somewhat rounded like a doubled die would be. It does not "match" the area nearby which it would be doubling - this is clue #1 that it is not a true hub doubled die. It also does not 'take up' any of the normal profile, which is clue #1 that it cannot be Machine Doubling. If it were Machine Doubling, other areas would be affected as well, and on these coins this is not the case.

I know this is in the die, because I have found it a number of times in multiples in BU rolls and bags. This would not be the case with Machine Doubling - basically this thing HAS to be in the die that minted the coins.

Sometimes these anomalous lines run outward from the vest and simply end in the field. Again, a clue that it is not a doubled die, but is also not Machine Doubling.

The only thing that strikes me as 'possible' as to what these things are would be some sort of tool work on the die to strengthen the front of the throat after a clash, or the front of the vest after polishing (probably to remove a clash). The only thing that does not warrant suh a suggestion is that these anomalies often show themselves near very strong relief areas that didn't NEED any enhancement.

At one time John Wexler was listing these as doubled dies, but I am not certain he is still doing so. Even if he is, I can say that they are not widely accepted as such by the collecting public, and would have a very low - if any - premium value listed as obscure doubled dies. I personally do not agree with calling them doubled dies, because the evidence of hub doubling is simply not there.

At any rate, what I do know is that they are common, they are not widely collected, there is very little if any interest in the die variety market for them, they are not very 'characteristic' of a 'wow-neato' coin that people collect BECAUSE they are different (errors, varieties, etc) - so I have by and large simply ignored them over the years. I see them on occasion and skip right by them. I will not attribute them as doubled dies, and give this basic - yet incomplete explanation as to what I think they are when people send them to me.

So the ball is up in the air. If anyone CAN give a definitive and comprehensive explanation as to what these are, I would be more than happy to listen. I know much more about what they cannot be than I know about what they actually are.

Hello all, was reading this post and was thinking about the possibility of it being a counter clash mark. It happens on Morgan dollar lips and hair, I'm just not sure if it could happen on other coins.
Edward M.

Back in the '80s or '90s I came across the term "recut" referring to the "ONE CENT" on the reverse of some Indian Head cents. Is this the same thing?

That's true. I was looking through and it isn't a full reference of all dies. More or less a Greatest finds thing. I was reading through it today and found something interesting in the "Forward". Something I didn't see before.

The coins probably WOULD sell...but I would have no part of it. They have no numismatic premium, so I would be against selling them at a premium just because you can. Very few people look for them or collect them, and a lot of us who find them toss them back because they are nothing special.