| Author |
 Replies: 30 / Views: 3,741 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
6562 Posts |
Yeah, well that was always my problem with the default MD explanation. The mint mark showed a huge ghost, and the date right next to it was clean. Also, I cannot recall running across a Denver example with that phenomenon, and why wouldn't it happen on a D? I guess it's a fortunate time to resurrect this discussion, because I just wrapped my 1999-P nickels to dump at the bank. I will pull the rolls back apart and find those nickels.
Silviosi, if I understand your possibility, the machine that formed the 1999-P mint mark could have caused a doubled hub? I guess we should start with a description of the manufacturing process, because I am having a hard time visualizing it. The old school was a punch. Most recent is CNC cutting into the hub. What was the intermediate process in the late 1980s and early 1990s?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
6244 Posts |
@ Brandmeister:
1989 early year was the last time MM was punch manually. After March 1989 the MM was punch on the Hub by presses. Almost same process as the Dies was press. So you has the Hub house aligned (the anvil) and the MM as the Hammer. was like this till Mid 1999 when the CNC change the portrait and this because the presses go from Vertical strike to Horizontal strike (reflex presses), more accurate and fasters.
I do not recall well who wrote about those RPM's as more as DD's. Was Wexler or Stanton or maybe Mike. I discussed this topic with Stan and Herb in time and I remember they state that are RPM's as we know but in fact are Hub Doubling so DD's. I think the article was in Coins World (not sure).
Edited by silviosi
07/29/2023 11:45 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6562 Posts |
Ok, but the hub is a positive. You can't punch a mark into the positive, can you? The mark is a raised element on a hub, just like on the final coin. You can only punch into a negative like a die. The CNC doesn't have that problem because it starts with excess metal and removes it, so it can easily make a positive as well as a negative.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6562 Posts |
Well, that was blind luck. I had ten wrapped rolls. The first roll that I picked, the 1999-P from those photos were right on the end. Next time I am going to wish for 10 War Nickels in a row or something! What would you like me to image on these nickels? MM, date, any particular features? |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
6244 Posts |
Brand I ask Mike to take a look also.
Yes it is but think at Master Die who imprint the Working Hub. This was same operation but particular for the MM, then the Hub go to the hardener process.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
56855 Posts |
Last RPM was 1989? Looks like DDD to me. John1  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2739 Posts |
Error coin writer and researcher.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3237 Posts |
How did this become one we needed Mike to weigh in on? Lol, glad he confirmed the obvious, but feels like using a tank to swat a mosquito.
|
|
Moderator
United States
56855 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6562 Posts |
If the diagnosis is DDD, then it would be interesting to understand why the DDD acted so powerfully on the mint mark, and seemingly very little on the surrounding devices. It might also be nice to have a full pic of the coin face, so we can see everything that might have been affected. |
|
New Member
 United States
5 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6562 Posts |
Well, you can definitely see massive deterioration ghosts on the reverse. Assuming the obverse and reverse dies were installed as a pair, that would support Mr. Diamond's assertion. Also some action on the N of In and G of God. It would still be useful to know why the DDD so powerfully affected the mint mark and not the 1999. What is it about that tiny feature (and seemingly about the 1999-P nickels in particular) that causes deterioration like that on the P? Silviosi was talking about '99 being a transition year of techniques. Maybe the Mint discovered something on the P from '99 that they then corrected on 2000-P? Because I've looked at a lot of these nickels under magnification, and I don't ever remember seeing it this bad on the 2000-2003 years. |
|
New Member
United States
5 Posts |
thanks everyone for your input I don't know if it helped me I guess I was wrong I don't have a dd or rpm nickel, I just have a common mdd.. thanks again.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
319 Posts |
I just found this nickel in change and it looks like the one from the post from member chris617 in July '23. I gathered the consensus was Die Deterioration. Yes? It is just so sharp and clean -which I don't often see as DD. Am I reopening a point of disagreement?    |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4135 Posts |
I have found many of these and as already stated, it is DDD, I know it looks different |
| |
Replies: 30 / Views: 3,741 |
First Page
Posted 07/29/2023 11:36 pm
