| Author |
 Replies: 59 / Views: 6,521 |
|
Valued Member
United States
314 Posts |
A few days ago I took delivery of a fairly nice 1915-D Lincoln Cent, which would not be particularly noteworthy except that it represented the conclusion of a half-century dream of completing the 1909 to 1958 Lincoln collection (I may report more on that story later). The complication is that when I use the word "conclusion," we all know that's not the whole story. It would be according to the old Whitman folders which were the original homes for these cents, because they have holes for neither the 1922 No D nor the 1955 DDO. The Dansco 7103, however, as you all know, has a spot for the 1922 Plain, as they call it. Interestingly, they do not provide for the 1955 DDO. I find that somewhat interesting, as it seems to me that the '22 is "just" a product of a worn die that happened to capture public imagination, while the DDO is a truly distinctive coin both in appearance and in origin. I have calculated that if I add those two coins to my set, the cost will be approximately five times the cost of the entire balance of the collection. That seems pretty crazy, but it makes me more than a little frustrated to have one blank hole and a second implicit hole in my otherwise nicely filled album. So I solicit any opinions that more experienced collectors might offer on this matter. Do any of you have peace of mind having a collection that does *not* include one or both of those coins? Or do you think it really is just not a complete set without including those two pieces? I know the answer ultimately is "Whatever you think," but I'm very interested in how other people may have processed the issue. Thanks in advance for any insights. If I missed a previous discussion on this (I searched), then pardon me and please give me the link. Otherwise, I hope for a lively discussion. |
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
486 Posts |
i don't like the inclusion of either, because they are not a separate date or mint mark, one is a DDO and the other is a worn die. I have a dansco and I hate empty holes so I guess I may have to find something to replace the 22 plain hole or save up and buy one |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1132 Posts |
The 55 DDO is considered an "error" coin. If your gonna collect every error coin from 1909-1958 your gonna be in for alot more $ than the "no-D", LOL. The holes are what bugs me. No hole, no problem!  Edited by CopperCastle
10/01/2015 9:59 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
4227 Posts |
Quote:The 55 DDO is considered an "error" coin. It's not an error, but a variety. Definitely a difference. Still, other varieties aren't included, it's only because this one's so famous, so it likely shouldn't be either. Edited by chequer
10/01/2015 10:20 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4932 Posts |
The only reason the 55 DDO is worth so much is due to the hype. I do believe there's less 83 DDR's and 84 DDO's in existence then the 55 DDO alone. |
|
Valued Member
 United States
314 Posts |
Hype definitely comes into play, or you can say it another way, which is that I think many collectors develop an emotional feeling about a coin for a variety of reasons, often going back to the early days of their collecting. For me as a kid, the "magical" coins in the series were the 1909-S-VDB, the 1914-D, and the 1955 DDO. The first two are fairly obvious. The '55 always fascinated me because I loved the way all the letters and numbers were so dramatically doubled, while the bust is unaffected. For me, it's one of the most interesting variety coins in the modern lineup. As I recall, it has always been prominently pictured in the Red Book, and it has always been expensive, so I guess those are a large part of the explanation, too. I've never been particularly interested in the '22, but I guess I could talk myself into it. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
982 Posts |
Of course, not much attention would have ever been placed on the 1922, except for the fact that the mint in Philadelphia did not produce any cents that year. Since the slot in the Dansco album simply states "1922 Plain," I suppose a less expensive die-paring variety would suffice to fill the hole. Here's an article on the die paring varieties: http://www.lincolncentresource.com/...rieties.html |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
18456 Posts |
I don't include the 22 no D or the 55 D/D in my Lincoln set. In my Whitman album there is a hole for the 22 no D and no hole for the 55 D/D . to me the 22 is more or less a mint error and the 55 IS a mint error. As far as I'm concerned there should NOT be a hole in ANY album for any of them. for those who disagree with me; should there be a hole for:1909-VDB-ddo, 1917-ddo , 1936-ddo , 1941-ddo, ETC.?  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5825 Posts |
Just a guess but I think Dansco included those two coins because they felt it would help sell the albums.
Look at it from the viewpoint of the collector that DOES have those two coins.
Without a hole to place them in the collector is just as annoyed as you are.
IMO you should NEVER obtain those two coins (and several other LWCs') unless they are slabbed.
Too much money involved for frequently faked coins.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4085 Posts |
I don't consider either one to be part of my Lincoln set. I put a D mint token from an uncirculated set in the 22 plain slot in my Dansco to fill the hole.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3107 Posts |
What T-BOP said...   |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1373 Posts |
Neither of the Two Cents are listed (or desired) on my set. I've never felt right about how lots of mint 'errors' are added to set 'gospels'. I don't think that a worker or machine screw-up should make a coin more favorable than the ones they made correctly. It's like paying extra for a car that only has three tires, a leaky gas tank, or no door handles.  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
19935 Posts |
You all know I'm a hardcore Lincoln collector, I don't have a 22 no D DP2 nor a 1955/55 and probably never will. As an error and a variety, respectively, I don't consider those as part of a "complete", business-type collection. They are very cool coins but WAY over-priced IMO. For the money spent on just those two coins, I'd much rather have several higher-end "regular" Lincolns. The good thing about the no D, you can buy a much more reasonable DP1, DP3 or DP4 coin. If you gotta fill that hole, go with one of the other die pairs. Lately I've seen those selling for $200-300 which is a more respectable price point. I sold this damaged DP1 to a member here on CC for <$100 some years ago, it was a great deal and finally filled that darn no D hole:    Lincoln Cent Lover!VERDI-CARE™ INVENTOR https://verdi.care/
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
513 Posts |
If you *had* a 1922 Plain or the 1955 DDO, would you put them in the folder or in the album anyway? |
|
Valued Member
United States
314 Posts |
Thanks for all these replies. Thanks for that link, captainrich. BadThad, I'm a bit surprised, but interested, that you do not feel a need to collect these. And I appreciate the thought about DP1, 3, or 4. As you know, if you read certain commentary, you can get sort of closed-minded about DP2. I certainly would have been happy to pay that price for the coin you display above. To Garoyn's question, my answer is an emphatic "No." I would not buy an uncertified '22 because it's obviously so subject to faking, and I wouldn't by any coin the price of the '55 without certification. Someone needs to make a cent-sized piece of copper with a nice engraving of the words, "I have this coin, but it's in a slab in the safe deposit box."
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
982 Posts |
Quote:
Someone needs to make a cent-sized piece of copper with a nice engraving of the words, "I have this coin, but it's in a slab in the safe deposit box." Centsei, I completely agree with you. Some of these albums are quite nice, but if a coin is worth $500 or more I don't risk having it in an album with sliding plastic sleeves or exposed to the surrounding elements. Consequently, my Dansco Lincoln set album looks a little odd because the key coins are pretty worn, while all the others are AU/BU. |
| |
Replies: 59 / Views: 6,521 |
Posted 10/01/2015 9:23 pm
