5c - 1965 Different Types Of "5"

I have no doubt its a DDR, once I seen the doubled/split stems of the leaves and the splits in "CENTS" I called it a day, however I do have a couple on hand in MS once I get on my computer ill post some.

I am not questioning the DDR, but two different 5s suggest a second matrix or master punch... I'd like to see overlays of the 5s with mint state coins.

Completely understandable, I was directing it more towards other members who may get confused about the DDR and clarifying that it was, from my previous research there is two type of 5's like the OP says, but to add to the mix the " DDR + Doubled 5" is also most common on the "Type 1" which can make it even more confusing.

the whole DDR aspect aside, I've done every overlay and measurement possible with the examples I had and still came to the same conclusion, the 5's really are different, if its from deterioration or like you said a second matrix or master punch I have no idea.

I do have a couple BU rolls of 65's I still need to go through (for this exact reason) but have not got around to cracking them until now. If I manage to find both types in MS i'll do a good overlay.

From the looks of numidan's images hes came to the same conclusion I did regarding the 5's being different.

Rather than drawing lines and grids - which seems pointless to me, can you overlay the 5s? Or even better, overlay the entire date.?

Seriously? Try again without the silly GIF animation... how on earth can we examine anything in detail with your overlays, when the image shifts every few seconds?

Perhaps my request was not clear enough?

Welcome to my world. That is how science works. You provide a hypothesis, and then subject your findings to peer review.

The onus is not on me to prove if there are in fact two difference 5s here. Assuming so means two master punches and dies. This is your hypothesis, and in support of trying to see what you were seeing, I was asking for something that would result as unequivocal evidence, that myself (and others here) could all agree to.




In my world, that is called "shifting the burden of proof"...

What you are asking for SPP, an overlay of a thin font 5 onto a thick font 5, made it hard to determine where an edge begins and where it ends. Due to frustration, that is why I was asking you to try it out so you can better appreciate the differences.

Overlay asked for:


Instead, here I coloured one five yellow and overlay the other on top to show the differences. This is the best I can do is this.

It is not the first time we been having these kind of debates SPP and I hope all sees that I try to be very thorough with my analysis, like in this case well over 480 coins.

The main reason for investigating this: I just could not explain how the doubling on the 5 occurred. I was convinced it was a true doubled die but using the few 1965 nickels I had (sad to say they were all type 2), I was not able to justify it. Just recently, I purchased many circulated rolls of 1965, and upon type 1 discovery, I now can confirm the doubled die on 1965!




I agree, if it was easy to determine, we would not be talking about it 55 years after being released in circulation.

I've looked at the surface and did not find any marker that would distinguish one type over another, the easiest way is drawing a line on top of the 5 and determining where it lies on the 9.

So, will it be collectible, I do not know!

But now we know which punch made the doubled 5 working die on the 1965 and it is easy to see this difference and can be collectible.