| Author |
 Replies: 9 / Views: 892 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5318 Posts |
I found this tonight in change, and curious what those of you experienced with RPMs think? Thanks!  The best photo my camera can muster...I need to get a setup for my microscope:  another lighting angle:  and one more:  Edited by KurtS
01/10/2008 1:05 pm
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1934 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
5318 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
827 Posts |
I see split serif top right of the #7. hmmm interesting.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
914 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5318 Posts |
Sleaklight...yes, I noticed that too. Even under my scope, I can't decide whether the date is machine doubled or something else.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3507 Posts |
I lean toward both the date and the MM as being Machine Doubled. I will say though that seeing this one in 2 dimensions rather than in hand makes it a little tough to be sure. I am basing this on the fact that the date and the MM seem to be doubled to the same degree in the same direction and that indicates Machine Doubling on cents of this period. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5318 Posts |
foundinrolls, thanks for your insights! While I certainly suspect Machine Doubling for the date, I wonder if those doubled features inside the loop of the "S" would be due to Machine Doubling? If the mm shears from die motion, wouldn't the whole mm be sheared on the outside in reference to the coin field? I should also mention that under 400X on my scope, the mm appears triple doubled in some lighting angles. Just reporting what I see...I have no expertise here! Edited by KurtS
01/11/2008 12:05 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7629 Posts |
If the date and mintmark are both doubled and the coin dates before 1990, it's Machine Doubling...guaranteed. The date and mintmark were placed into the die by completely different processes at completely different times. Extremely unlikely for both to accidentally have the same degree of doubling in the same direction. The stuff in the mintmark is part of the punch....same as 1968, 1969, 1970. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5318 Posts |
Yes, since I see doubling in both places, I would have to strongly suspect Machine Doubling. Still, it's interesting enough to hold on to...thanks! |
| |
Replies: 9 / Views: 892 |
|
Posted 01/10/2008 1:16 pm
