| Author |
 Replies: 16 / Views: 3,231 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
984 Posts |
I am just interested in the answer of that ? if possible, if not it's ok. thank you.
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
No. During the 1965-1967 period, all coins were minted without mint marks. There is a record how many were struck at each mint. But without the mint mark you can't tell. (as far a I know)
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4404 Posts |
There are no design variations between mint locations that I know of. However, in recent years, I've noticed a slight difference in strike quality between Philly and Denver Mints. It's not consistent and I don't find it practical to identify this difference. Denver minted coins (at least the majority of the ones I've seen here around Philly, I don't see them too often) typically has stronger luster than a typical Philly business strike and the small details, most designers' initials are very flat and rounded. (I believe 2010-D WDDO-001 is due to this strike quality difference and not a DDR). |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
984 Posts |
Thank you very much coop. the reason I ask sometimes I think that some of the 1982 sd's with no mint mark 3.1 g are actually denver coins with a weak or no mint mark.  in this samle you can see many D mintmarks printed under 1982 and this is 1982 sd 3.1 g and I have more coins to show. in 1922 they had a problem, but they knew it and it was all in Denver, but may be now they still don't, or may be that's me. thanks. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3660 Posts |
Beginning in 2006, there were strike quality differences between Denver and Philadelphia coins. At the end of 2005, Denver switched to horizontal-strike Schuler presses, which impart a smoother and more even strike. Philadelphia still has multi-head vertical strike Bliss presses. Especially for 2006-2010, many Denver coins exhibited smooth fields and mirror finishes. This was especially evident on the cents. Since then, the differences are much less obvious. Philadelphia still accounts for most of the IDBs, die clashes, Cuds, and die cracks. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
984 Posts |
Thank you very much guys and all for your reply, but what do you think about the coin, this is 1982 sd 3.1 g and you can see the D mintmark, misplaced yes, but it's a D mintmark. anyone, what do you think?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
984 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
It appear to be a Philly cent. It is were a 'D', the date would have to be that weak also. The same amount of pressure the make the date rise, the mint mark would do the same. Rise just like the date it were on the die. It is not a Denver cent.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
984 Posts |
Thank you coop, but it happened in 1922 "D" mintmark was weak or no mintmark, and the dates were mostly fine.
I am not saing it's Denver, but I think there is a chance, I also have few more of these with way weaker dates, I may try Wexler again. I don't know, what if it's Denver it's probably risky to mail it, but I will. thanks again.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Quote:
Thank you coop, but it happened in 1922 "D" mintmark was weak or no mintmark, and the dates were mostly fine. Take another close look at the 1922 real no mint marks cents (die pair 2), you will see that the date is not that good. If you see a 22 plain with a good sharp date, it's a fake. Edited by Conder101
01/02/2019 11:48 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
Fake 1922:  If the Philly mint made cents that year, nothing would be even considered about the over polished die issue. But because they needed to fill a certain number and we told they weren't getting more obverse dies, they made due with what they had that year. |
|
Valued Member
United States
254 Posts |
I thought the 22 was a result of a clash that was polished out that took out the D
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
984 Posts |
As I sad before I nevere sad it's Denver, and it's probably me, but I have been looking at hundreds of these 1982 sd's 3.1 g and marked many of them with weak "D"'S and until I clear it for myself and I think I have a few, not sure, with weaker dates, but I have the highest respect coop and all on cc and I sad it before and I'll say again that I am going to need another lifetime to come even close to the knowledge that coop has on coins. Thank you, if I find ones with weak d and weak date I will post it.
thanks.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12477 Posts |
One primary difference between the '22 Plain and an '82-D Copper SD is the known/confirmed/certified population. The stats do not favor the '82.
In Memory of Crazyb0 12-26-1951 to 7-27-2020
In Memory of Tootallious 3-31-1964 to 4-15-2020
In Memory of T-BOP 10-12-1949 to 1-19-2024
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
571 Posts |
There is no D mint mark on the coin you posted. Just a combination of staining and wishful thinking. Don't you think it odd that all the coins you have with a "weak mintmark" just happen to all be on copper planchets? There have only been one or two 1982-D small date coppers found so far, so it would seem impossible to me for so many of these "weak mintmark" coins to all be on copper planchets, since the vast majority (all but 2 so far out of the literal billons minted) of the normal mintmark coins were produced on zinc planchets.
|
| |
Replies: 16 / Views: 3,231 |
Posted 01/02/2019 8:33 pm
