| Author |
 Replies: 32 / Views: 3,416 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2177 Posts |
I found this in a roll. It looks like an S under a D mintmark but it all looks wrong. As if someone was trying to make a fake out of this.   |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1219 Posts |
Thingee, in the second picture you can see the flow lines where the MM took a hit. Just seperated the top of the D a bit. My interperation.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12437 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7629 Posts |
The top of the mintmark was scraped off going upward.
It might be a better idea to try focusing on the dates and mints that are known to have die varieties rather than trying to make one out of a date where nothing of any excitement is known. Try a couple of rolls of 1955D or 1956D cents. Those run $1-$2 in circulated condition. Another good possibility is a BU roll of 1960D large date cents. Those run $1-$2 and are usually LOADED with RPMs.
Checking through pocket change at 50 different years of coins is something that should be left for when you know what you're looking for. Try developing the eye with variety-rich dates.
|
|
Valued Member
138 Posts |
This looks like a die chip. I see MD on the 9, can you give a closeup photo of Obv
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3507 Posts |
As Stated above this is just damage. No real need to take any other pictures.
Thanks..
|
|
Valued Member
138 Posts |
Your right it is damage, but this is not just a distortion of MM. It's a blundered MM D possibly over an S MM. This is because MM D is a slab atop of another. That's my view. Worth about $5.
Edited by Homer1
02/15/2008 01:28 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3507 Posts |
No D/S, just metal moved during the process that terribly scraped the mintmark. It's worth approximately One cent...
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7629 Posts |
Homer - no disrespect intended, but before giving advice you might want to study up on what you're giving advice on. This coin is an obvious case of simple damage...that's all.
|
|
Valued Member
138 Posts |
I did studied up on it and that's my opinion. However unorthodox my view is to you. It has validity if you look close enough. I appreciate and value both of your opinions and took that in account. But now it's up to the above inquirer to bring it to an independent source and outside opinion. Be informed that I observed what Thingee saw. Send it out to Ken Potter if it's feasible.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3507 Posts |
I'll tell you what,
I email Ken with the picture and ask him. It will save the postage and confirm what does not need to be confirmed as it already has been. Every "unorthodox" view has to have experience and a thorough knowledge of the minting process behind it. I'll bet you that coppercoins has closely looked at several million mintmarks (and still counting) in his day. I can tell you that I've looked at more than three million mintmarks (and still counting) in my day.
Ken has looked at millions of mintmarks as well in his many years of study of coins, There is a lot of back and forth between many of us as we compare and discuss coins.
Anyone with, as I suggested the experience and the knowledge of the minting process, whether it be Ken, Chuck, John W., James W.,K. Flynn, Bill C., Bill F. JT S., or myself, etc etc and so on...will undoubtedly say that this is damage.
No disrespect intended either, but many of us have made a specific effort to study and understand the specifics of die varieties to a point where we can even narrow down date ranges of a cent when we look at a mintmark.
For example, probably 85% of normal 1979 D cents have a clogged mintmark , with a raised area in the center that is always questioned as a D/S. It isn't.
This one has such an obvious scrape and damage that a rookie can tell it is no D/S. Why muddy the waters with guesswork.
In any case, I'll be out for a bit today, I'll email Ken when I get back.
Chuck, I think you understand that we agree on this coin but since one forum member wants to have Ken's opinion, I'll get it for the forum so it can be a "learning experience" for the forum:-)
Thanks,
Bill
Edited by foundinrolls
02/16/2008 3:09 pm
|
|
Valued Member
138 Posts |
I welcome Ken Potter's opinion in this particular matter and look forward in hearing from him, if indeed it is him. If I'm Wrong about this it's a lesson for me and all. I'm never shrink from learning something new nor from an argument if it arises. So if other issues arise I will pay closer attention. Thank you For going out of your way and helping us understand. I still want a closeup of the MM of that coin, if possible, Thank you. Besides this not about muddying the the water but more like seeing it for myself. I have to see this with my own eyes if you will. I think there is more than one person here that wants to know the outcome of this subject not just me. But others may choose not to weight in on it. So no disrespect intended to you.
Edited by Homer1
02/16/2008 4:52 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
2177 Posts |
I will try to get a better pic for you Homer. All the pics taken are blurry and not just on the MM. Thanks for inquiring Ken Potter Bill. Maybe better pics will do. This coin is still questionable to me, mind you that I'm not an expert and I have poor eyesight. If I get a chance tomorrow I will take it to the coin shop. One of the dealers there knows a lot about errors. I'll keep everyone posted.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3507 Posts |
Stated above.... "I welcome Ken Potter's opinion in this particular matter and look forward in hearing from him, if indeed it is him."
I can assure you that it will be him...
|
|
Valued Member
138 Posts |
Thank you in your effort to get better photos for me thingee and everyone else for putting up with me.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3507 Posts |
Hi All,
Here is Ken's response exactly as he wrote it to me.
"Bill,
Not a very good photo but my first guess is that the MM got scraped.
I do not see a "variety" or "error."
You can quote me.
Thanks!
Ken"
That's that....
|
| |
Replies: 32 / Views: 3,416 |
Posted 02/14/2008 08:47 am
