| Author |
 Replies: 13 / Views: 1,146 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4409 Posts |
You might check your 1948-D cents for this repunched mint mark shifted eastward. http://www.numismaticnews.net/artic...medium=emailHappy searching folks! Edit: Not sure where I got 1978 from LOL I need to quit trying to multi-task on Friday mornings  -MV Edited by MeadowviewCollector
04/01/2016 2:25 pm
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1944 Posts |
with all due respect the coin in the article is a 1948 (not 1978).
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
I would have to see an earlier die state on that one. The die flow area falls exactly where the RPM is.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
853 Posts |
I agree coop. Also, the loop of the D on this possible RPM is stronger than than the comparison coin in the article (1955D-FS-503), yet there appears to be no evidence of the vertical bar of the D. The vertical bar is easily seen on the '55-D. That being said, it wouldn't rule out an RPM. There could have been some vertical misalignment to the secondary "punch". It's just an added observation of mine. Interesting nonetheless. I'll keep my eyes peeled for additional info or specimens, that's for sure.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
If the 1960D-1MM-023 could remain die flow free even in the LDS examples, why wouldn't th2 1948-D die if it is a RPM have earlier die states that would show a RPM.  A thinking question:On the 1960D-1MM-023 I posted above; Why would the faint line on the RPM still be visible even in the later die states? Think on this and give your answer. Edited by coop
04/01/2016 7:21 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
853 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
They are one of the nicer RPMs. I've seen the for sale by the BU roll once, but they wanted full retail for every coin. I had to pass.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3644 Posts |
Because of the much higher relief on the primary mintmark with the metal flow into that area it takes stress and wear away from that area of the die...i tried explaining whats inside my head on this one the best I could lol
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
The design is deep into the die. So die flow would not affect it. Polishing could, but it didn't. The die flow only affected it a little. Note on Jay's images the lower right side is affected a bit. On my image you can see a bit of die flow starting at the upper right side of the RPM.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3644 Posts |
That is kind of what I meant I think-with the high relief aka being deep into the die that that was the reason you could still see the secondary mint mark
Edited by Slamnbass
04/02/2016 12:22 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3644 Posts |
I do see what your explaining tho on both the mint marks
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1781 Posts |
It's rather dangerous to use just one RPM as an example what of what you "think" should be in the opposing direction without further study. For example, 1961-D 1c CONECA RPM-007 shows two secondary horizontal bars of the D with very slight upper curves but no belly at all. On the other hand 1961-D RPM-069 only shows the belly of the D. There are hundreds of examples of RPMs that show mainly just the belly or vertical to a greater or lesser degree. In doing overlays I found on the 1948-D that if a vertical bar did exist the center of its radius would be under the belly of the primarily D or so close that it may have been wiped out my metal displacement when the primary D was punched in. Further, the style of the Denver Mintmark for 1953 show that it features a belly that was much wider than on the 1960-D RPM-23. Overlays that I created using the center of the radius of the primary D's belly centered over the belly of the secondary D shows what would have been a thin vertical bar (if one ever existed) would be tucked under the belly of the primary D. Thus a vertical of the secondary should't exist within the center of the primary. This is one of those RPMs you have to see in your hand. I wasn't 100% convinced either until I saw the coin in hand.    |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
853 Posts |
Ken, don't get me wrong, I wasn't disputing it was an RPM. Just stating an observation. I know the punches can be tilted, and said that in my previous post. You, and coop also, have many more years experience in this game than I. I don't want you to think I was disputing your claim, just making observations. I hold the utmost respect for you pros. I'm on the lookout for one of these regardless.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1781 Posts |
Jay, I completely understand that and noted your observations where not that of others. My point to the entire group weighing in on this was that you can't compare applies to oranges and get anything out of it. Using the 1960-D #23 as an example without doing any overlays or taking into consideration that there are hundreds of RPMs out there sans a vertical bar and not taking into consideration that the styles of the Denver Mintmarks are completely different from 1948 and 1960 is kind of a bad way to assess things. As you can see by my overlay it wouldn't have even been possible (or probable) that the vertical would have been there.
s
|
| |
Replies: 13 / Views: 1,146 |
|
Posted 04/01/2016 2:15 pm
