| Author |
 Replies: 14 / Views: 3,836 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
738 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
738 Posts |
  nobody know? |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
853 Posts |
I think I see the doubling on the chin in the IN GOD picture. Is the back of ear & hair detail behind the ear doubled? It looks similar to WWHO-002. See here: http://doubleddie.com/1141429.htmlGood luck! |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
738 Posts |
thank you Jay for your input,i think you're right in your option,here is couple pics from question area   |
|
Valued Member
United States
311 Posts |
There are 18 SMS DDO's in the CONECA listing. Using my collection comparing the notching on the top left part or WE, and the doubling on the top left part of the last T in TRUST from your photos as PUP, I don't think your half dollar matches anything in the CONECA listings. Send it to James Wiles at CONECA, maybe he can come up with something, or it could be a new discovery. Larry Nienaber |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
Did anyone note the WWHO notation on this die number? Wexler-Working-Hub-Obverse. Note the comment at the top of this thread on John's site: Quote:Significant changes have been made to the 1966 Kennedy half dollar obverse doubled die listings due to the discovery of three different obverse doubled working hubs. The reassignment of numerous 1966 Kennedy half dollar obverse doubled die listings as being from the obverse doubled working hubs left huge "holes" in the obverse doubled die listings for this date. As an example, there were once 37 listings for the 1966 obverse doubled dies. Now there are just 12 working dies and the three working hubs. Many listings were assigned new numbers in order to fill the gaping holes in the listings. Notations of these changes are made for each of the affected varieties. So while it is a doubled die, it is less valuable because of a working hub having doubling on it. Makes it common. Bummer. |
|
Valued Member
United States
311 Posts |
Coop...Not everyone agrees with that statement from Wexler's site. I use the CONECA Master Listings for my collection and attributions.
Larry Nienaber
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
853 Posts |
Larry, has Dr. wiles said that he doesn't think it's working hub related? I know different die variety specialists have different views sometimes. Or, has he not gotten around to studying this issue yet and could later change his mind. The differences in opinion on issues like these interests me greatly. Just wondering if you know. I know your strong on Kennedys.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
84 Posts |
Quote:
Larry, has Dr. wiles said that he doesn't think it's working hub related? I know different die variety specialists have different views sometimes. Or, has he not gotten around to studying this issue yet and could later change his mind. The differences in opinion on issues like these interests me greatly. Just wondering if you know. I know your strong on Kennedys. James Wiles comment on the 1966 SMS Kennedy half dollar, his last sentence answers your question I think: "A special note is warranted for the 1966 obverse doubled dies. First, these doubled dies are very similar in appearance. Care should be taken to match your coin exactly to the descriptions and photos. I have done everything possible to insure that each description is accurate. A couple of helpful hints should make the identification process easier. Look for the rotational spreads on LIBERTY and the last 6 of the date. Then look for the various die scratches, gouges, etc. given in the stage listings. Second, the majority of these doubled dies have been given a class III designation (design hub doubling) even though two or more designs have not been identified. No other class of doubling appears to describe the doubling found on these coins. It is my conclusion that the designs were slightly shifted in relation to each other on the various hubs. It is possible that there could be a couple of doubled working hubs involved, though the doubling is unique enough for me to place them in the individual doubled die category at this time." |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
This was the first mention I've heard on this. But wanted this to be noted. Wexler didn't list them as a WDDO, but as a WWHO. I found that to be interesting. Till will tell on what others find on this possible issue with the Halves that year.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
84 Posts |
Quote:
Coop...Not everyone agrees with that statement from Wexler's site. I use the CONECA Master Listings for my collection and attributions.
Larry Nienaber Well said. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
853 Posts |
Thank you taclough! That was exactly what I was looking to find out. I'm drawn to the controversial varieties. Very interesting stuff!
|
|
Valued Member
United States
84 Posts |
Quote:
Thank you taclough! That was exactly what I was looking to find out. I'm drawn to the controversial varieties. Very interesting stuff! Your welcome. That comment from James Wiles can be found http://www.varietyvista.com/Variety....htm#_1966_5 at the start of the 1966 listings (it has been there for years - nothing new). |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
853 Posts |
Heck, I never go to the master list anymore since he started putting up the images. I should have thought to look there.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
311 Posts |
Have you seen what James Wiles has recently done with the 72S Kennedy's, designating working hubs? I think this may be the case with the 83S DDO's also. Larry Nienaber |
| |
Replies: 14 / Views: 3,836 |
|
Posted 04/18/2016 5:38 pm
