| Author |
 Replies: 24 / Views: 3,387 |
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
406 Posts |
I believe the mintmark has been added. I'm not too thrilled with the shape of the mintmark either, the top looks too small and the middle too bulgy. (The mintmark position does about match one of the four known for the issue, however.) And look at the reverse. A genuine 1909-S VDB shows a bulge on the lower corner of the N where the diagonal and upright join. There is no bulge on the N on this reverse. Folks, please don't buy uncertified key-date coins unless you are an expert at authentication and grading! There are many, many bogus coins out there. Best Regards,  George |
|
Valued Member
United States
406 Posts |
@ Yokozuna I think what you mean is correct, on genuine S-VDB examples, ignoring the periods, there is a bit greater space between D B than between V D and the VDB is shifted a bit left of center between the wheat ears, yes. Also the 1909 VDB matte proof and the S-VDB have the period between D B equidistant, where the 1909 VDB circulation strikes have the period between D B s tad closer to the D than the B. The genuine pieces show the center crossbar on the B diagonal, not horizontal. Best Regards, George |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4809 Posts |
I had a second look - indeed the first obverse photo date looks like 1907 where as the second obverse photo date looks to be 1909. The second photo also seems to show a tooling mark around the S MM (MM appears to be within a round tool mark/punch mark perhaps).
I think the right advice is being tossed out here: better to buy a certified coin rather than off line with lots of ?.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
19966 Posts |
Very worn, grease struck VDB with added mint mark.
Lincoln Cent Lover!VERDI-CARE™ INVENTOR https://verdi.care/
|
|
Valued Member
United States
286 Posts |
I would stay away from that one.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
9792 Posts |
Quote:
Does anyone else see a 7 in the date? Can't be in 1907 the mint wasn't even working on patterns of a Lincoln Cent yet. There would be a VDB in the shoulder area not on the reverse. Probably a 9 that was damaged and worn down intentionally to hide tooling marks from the added mintmark. "Buy the Book Before You Buy the Coin" - Aaron R. Feldman - "And read it" - Me 2013! ANA Life Member #3288 in good standing since 1981, ANS, Early American Coppers Member (EAC), Colonial Coin Collectors Club member (C4), Conder Token Collector Club member (CTCC), Civil War Token Society (CWTS) member, Liberty Seated Collectors Club (LSCC) & Numismatic Bibliomania Society member (NBS), USMex, Member in good standing, 2¢ variety collector. See my want page: http://goccf.com/t/140440 |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
3755 Posts |
Just want to make sure everyone knows I was NOT contemplating purchasing that AT ALL. I just happened to run across it while browsing the selection on ebay. I simply shared it to see if my observations were not just my crappy eyesight. LOL |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
20753 Posts |
Quote:
Looking at the date, I don't know if I see a 1909 or a 1907. I downloaded the image and inverted the colors and the last digit looks more like a 7 than a 9. However, think of this. This could be your chance to purchase a 1907 Almost S, VDB. Could well be the first Lincoln Cent made in not only SanFran but all over the world. AND even if the S was added, still imagine a real, actual, first of a kind, 1907 Lincoln Cent. Would be a start of an entire new series of Cents going backwards toward a 1906 Lincoln Cent. Manybe even earier.  I wonder if there were any Large Cent Lincoln Cents? Edited by just carl
06/29/2014 4:19 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
4618 Posts |
 LOL! ANA ID: 3203813 - CONECA ID: N-5637 Clean a coin that may be worth collecting? Please DON'T! When in doubt, leave it dirty!! 
|
| |
Replies: 24 / Views: 3,387 |
First Page
Posted 06/26/2014 07:48 am
