What's The Proper Nomenclature For This Here '42 Merc Dime Action?

On CCF, a Mercury dime is considered a Classic coin, so I moved your post to the appropriate section for the proper attention.

Please review the forum section descriptions, so posts are made in the correct section.

Nope, no D. It's a Philly.

Not to dismiss friendly help ever but I dug in for a month or so to do due diligence reading and research all areas of the forum to familiarize myself with the lingo, the etiquette, and the fundamentals of "so you just unearthed your grandparents long-forgotten, pretty hobby-level substantial American coin collection, now what"?

Clearly, I need to now read the finer points of how to use the medium, though. Haha. Also, I am a writer but I promise to not post novellas as a norm. I do suck at brevity but I don't have to rival War and Remembrance.

I have been giving acetone baths when I get the time to all those common coins suffering from my Grandma's nasty habit of taping coins (and, sadly, stamps as well)—-often with disappointing results. Haven't touched any of the semi-valuable coins for fear of cleaning coins. The black goo comes not from 40+ year tape residue but from the reverse coin side surface "melting" into the coin. It's a full-on assault from the crappy one-side reveal coin book (green, not blue).

I am partially fluent in mint-marks, luster, cartwheels, etc. Still stumped on Machine Doubling vs. die doubling and the more advanced varietals.

Super appreciate learning do's/dont's, dubious practices, enjoying the art and hunt of doing your hobby the respectable way from all the vets and practitioners here.

Trying not to do—-what do people think of this coin and that coin, what's it worth, and bombarding with things I should/could take the time to look up.

Figure I owe it to whole family to dive in first. But I figure time to dig in and ask when I hit brick walls like a tilted date not very well covered by another strike at it. More looks at it.

Could you perhaps provide a bit more clarity on what you mean by this statement?

Ok, I can do this. Clarify myself. No, not asking 42 over 41. It's clearly not. There's distinctly 1942 under this. Except titled at an angle. So, my question is, I guess, is this an example of Machine Doubling or what do you call this kind of production mess up. It's like the first one was done at a sloppy incorrect angle and done over to make it look right. I ask merely because all the Machine Doubling I've seen described is layered just barely off. And often confused with a doubled die. This one starts with the whole 1 exposed barely touching except the top and like I said, you can't really see the under 2 in my pic but the end of the bottom straight line of the two sticks out between the 45 degree opening on the back bottom of the top two.

Is this intentionally corrected dating or some other method?

Nomenclature is the wrong thing to ask.

How was this done and what do you call it? There. Phew. That was hard.

Tilted...not titled.

It's all weird to me and it just makes no sense to me. So, we can see the original 1 crystal clear. Let's call it perfectly 12-6 (it's not). The top 1 is struck at 12 and 5:25, slightly up and to the right.

But for the bottom 2 to stick out above the top 2's bottom straight line, the top 2 would have to angle down.

The 4 does this also, just not as pronounced. The bottom 4 sticks out above the cross line of the top 4. If the whole top date were struck off the bottom date as the 1 clearly shows, all the underneath numbers should stick out below.

My head hurts and it just occurred to me I am assuming a struck date is always linear—false.

But then again, if it's doubling, it's tilt would always be the same up and right until it went. It can't doubled itself a new angle, right? If a double starts slightly up and to the right, the whole part has to be up and to the right.

This absolutely does not happen here. There is no way the first two should end anywhere but below the top 2. Arrrrrrggh.

I'm going to go mow the lawn. You guys figure it out for me.

It looks like Machine Doubling on the date. The devices in the date have been reduced. It's flat and shelflike in appearance.

Flat and shelf-like. Flat and shelf-like. Got it. That's the mantra. Thank you fam. Knowledge +1 today for me.

I will go back to my crippling new hobby of watching 25 or 30 different Ikes battle for my attention as they non-stop a real time toning contest upon catching first light in 30+ years.

Let me know if anyone has a working theory about my Merc dime physics conundrum—-how can a true double exist both above and below the horizon of its original?

Perhaps a 4-digit date is struck numeral by numeral (but then it wouldn't be rightly called a machine double, rather four separate consecutive machine doublings—-something that sounds almost statistically impossible).

There must be a simple explanation. If the doubling begins higher than the original, how may it end lower? And, go team.

(I am not at all challenging opinion. A rainy day requires puzzles. Sorry. Some of you may have actual lives. So abandon topic at will.)

When done meditating, can we see the whole obverse and reverse? May help myself and others see the over all gravity of the current coins dilemma.

I generally don't like to make assumptions or avoid conjecture when dealing with a coins attribution, particularly when I only have a couple of devices singled out for scrutiny.

Judging current images I'd say it shows potential machine movement and or coupled with potential die deterioration. All of which can be present along side a verifiable Doubled Die. DD by the way is not currently apparent within the current denouement. Thanks, Doug.