| Author |
 Replies: 25 / Views: 3,800 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
20753 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3181 Posts |
Need better pics.  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1101 Posts |
Quote:
I would find it kind of hard to believe a repunched date that strong has not been previously described. I would agree with Condor101. Something doesn't look quite right about that coin to me, but if it is genuine, it's pretty spectacular! I'm sure there's a V nickle expert out there somewhere who can give a definitive answer. |
|
Valued Member
 83 Posts |
Quote:
Need better pics. Once in hand will shot new pic.  |
|
Valued Member
United States
59 Posts |
I am voting counterfeit. Dates were not punched by hand after 1908, so the entire bottom of the obverse should be doubled as much as the date. I see slight doubling on the stars to the left of the date but nothing on the base of the neck or the stars to the right.
Strong, isolated doubling like that can be created if the counterfeit die was created using a pantograph lathe and the bit jumps or shifts as it is tracing the design into the die.
Sean
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
900 Posts |
It doesn't look like MD to this rookie. |
|
Valued Member
83 Posts |
Quote:
I see slight doubling on the stars to the left of the date but nothing on the base of the neck or the stars to the right.  To the right Stars as attached crop photo shows doubling, I don't know if these are flash/lighting makes like it doubled. Using photo by a seller on Obverse if you check the Stars it's has doubling. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4406 Posts |
Quote:
Dates were not punched by hand after 1908, so the entire bottom of the obverse should be doubled as much as the date. Great point! However, I disagree with it being counterfeit. I think it is much more likely that the coin was improperly cleaned (hairlines on face and under chin) and what we are seeing is the glare coming off the polished devices. Considering how there is only one image of the coin on this thread (that has been edited ten times over), it's a good possibility it was just the image. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Quote:
Dates were not punched by hand after 1908 I think it depends on the denomination. I believe the Indian cent retained hand punched dates through 1909. I think the V nickel was hand punched through 1912. Barber dime, quarter, and half through the end of those series. The Saint-Gaudens gold ended hand punched dates for those denominations, and the 2 1/2 and $5 stopped hand punching in 1908. |
|
Valued Member
83 Posts |
Quote:I think it depends on the denomination. I believe the Indian cent retained hand punched dates through 1909. I think the V nickel was hand punched through 1912. Barber dime, quarter, and half through the end of those series. The Saint-Gaudens gold ended hand punched dates for those denominations, and the 2 1/2 and $5 stopped hand punching in 1908.  What hubbing processes has same anomaly on 2 different coins on same series 1910 V nickel as photo attached? |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6370 Posts |
Quote:I think the V nickel was hand punched through 1912. I just did some photo overlays, and it appears that the dates were hand-punched up to and including 1908. After that, every date was an exact match. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6370 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2125 Posts |
This Liberty 5¢ collector would love to see some more pics once it arrives! |
|
Valued Member
52 Posts |
Looking forward to new pics.
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 25 / Views: 3,800 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 05/01/2019 09:03 am
