Jefferson Nickel 1943/2

The older coins with punched dates were not made as Doubled Dies, so they were assigned the term Overdate. The new ones are made on the dies so they are assigned the term Doubled Die. If you call the newer coins an Overdate, then you'll have to start calling RPM's Doubled Dies.

That comparison makes absolutely zero logical sense. An overdate is not defined by a specific technical process. What it is changing the date on the die, the techniques used are secondary to the "overdate" nomenclature. As I mentioned earlier, before overdates involved date punches, dates on dies were chnaged by hand engraving.

That said, I collect overdates, but I'm not the ultimate authority on overdates. Go consult CPG, Coneca, and other numismatists on what qualifies as an overdate--or just think about the word "overdate" and what it means. I'm done talking about this--because saying this 1943/2 is somehow "not an overdate" borders on absurdity. It's a contrived definition that's misleading, and it's gets very close to trolling my thread.

I know about overdates--I specialize in overdates, and I've explained myself quite clearly on my thread. I'm well aware of the physical characteristics of an overdate on coins. I also find this remark rather condescending.

And just because you insist that overdates cannot involve hubbings does not make it so--consult Coneca, CPG, Wexler, etc. There's also a larger world out there of modern overdates that were hubbed. How you've insisted on hijacking my thread about my recent acquisition to push this misleading definition is really getting old--just stop.

You're free to call this variety whatever you like--but coming here to correct anyone who calls this variety an overdate--despite what many numismatists say--is misleading, frankly pretty rude and a big thread-jack. And I have let the mods know--cheers.

Take heart, Tm. This reminds me of my "Inexpensive Doubled Die" question that turned into a debate about whether a DD is an error or not when that wasn't even the question I asked.

I will still call a doubled die an error because I can and it makes sense to me. (Also, the CCF Glossary for "doubled die" calls it an error and for "error", it includes doubled dies. Maybe it should be updated if there is a consensus?)

To me, the term "overdate" is obvious. Why convolute it? It's one date over another. A doubled die does not automatically imply an overdate as many have the same date. Therefore, a separate term is needed to clarify what has happened. An overdate is not doubling because the device(s) are different, not doubled.

The suggestion that RPMs should be considered doubled dies with this line of thought does not make sense to me either. If they were that, then every punched overdate should be also just as most 20th-Century mintmarks were hand-punched.

______


To more established members: Please understand that a lot of people do not have the knowledge (I'm not speaking for Thulium but, rather, myself) that those of you possess. It may require patience but the information will come across. There were patronizingly toned comments here and I, personally, take very poorly to that when trying to learn and opening myself up. We are not just usernames.