| Author |
Replies: 10 / Views: 1,252 |
|
|
New Member
United States
6 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
589 Posts |
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4078 Posts |
Ctan,  to CCF. These could be of interest. Lets see what the other members think.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Puerto Rico
778 Posts |
 They look like machine damage.
|
|
New Member
 United States
6 Posts |
ok thanks. that's disappointing :( I'll keep on trucking I guess
|
|
Moderator
 United States
56855 Posts |
98 looks like MD,62-D looks like the MM took a hit but could have been an RPM,74 MD,73 & 72 look normal with wear. John1 
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2651 Posts |
Good pictures by the way. Taking good pictures is very valuable for getting good answers from the forum.  to the forum!
|
|
New Member
 United States
6 Posts |
ok. thanks much. I think I'm getting the hang of it. This seems to be more harder than it seems.
|
|
New Member
United States
11 Posts |
It's very hard and time consuming. Have you got a penny album? 1909-58? Or a 1959-present is where I started. It makes it so when looking for errors or key dates your still getting to full fill a collection which keeps your sprit is high and keeps you looking
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
901 Posts |
 The flatness of the shelflike doubling is a good example of Machine Doubling. The mintmark may be a repunched mint mark, John's guessis are good ones. Double dies the doubling is more rounded, also look for the second eyelid. 1953 double die, note doubling on 1 and 9.  Double die 2nd eyelid below and to the right  1956D/D rpm1 
|
|
Moderator
 United States
56855 Posts |
For you newbies, it is doubled die not double die. John1 
|
| |
Replies: 10 / Views: 1,252 |
|