Coin Community Family of Web Sites Join Thousands of Coin, Bullion, & Money Collectors
300,000 items to help build your collection! Coin, Banknote and Medal Collectors's Online Mall Vancouvers #1 Coin and Paper Money Dealer Royal Canadian Mint products, Canadian, Polish, American, and world coins and banknotes. Shop for APMEX Bullion on eBay!Join Thousands of Coin, Bullion, & Money Collectors Specializing in Modern Numismatics








Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?


This page may contain links that result in small commissions to keep this free site up and running.

Welcome Guest! Registering and/or logging in will remove the anchor (bottom) ads. It's Free!

43 & 72s Lincolns That Are Probably Mech. Doubled

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 6 / Views: 979Next Topic  
Valued Member
jcuve's Avatar
United States
142 Posts
 Posted 04/21/2008  02:07 am Show Profile   Bookmark this topic Add jcuve to your friends list Get a Link to this Message Number of Subscribers
These two Lincoln cents are probably both Mechanical Doubling: a 1970-S and a 1943. I was hoping they weren't but I have been checking around - I was surprised to discover that Mechanical Doubling could be so varied. I thought it was more localized, maybe just the date.

With this '43 it affected everything, all outside devices and the portrait; the '70 at first, to me, mimicked the '60 sm/lg date.

I have now seen another similar '43, and then a comparable '95 demonstrating extreme Mechanical Doubling; I have also heard, though don't know first hand, that late sixties and early seventies Lincolns were prone to the doubling seen on this '70-S.

If I'm wrong, let me know...


43-&-72s-Lincolns-That-Are-Probably-Mech.-Doubled

43-&-72s-Lincolns-That-Are-Probably-Mech.-Doubled

43-&-72s-Lincolns-That-Are-Probably-Mech.-Doubled

43-&-72s-Lincolns-That-Are-Probably-Mech.-Doubled

43-&-72s-Lincolns-That-Are-Probably-Mech.-Doubled

43-&-72s-Lincolns-That-Are-Probably-Mech.-Doubled

43-&-72s-Lincolns-That-Are-Probably-Mech.-Doubled

Pillar of the Community
j_h_s's Avatar
United States
1934 Posts
 Posted 04/21/2008  04:54 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add j_h_s to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Based on CONECAs website, the 43's date does not have the thickness for DD. Nice doubling in the lettering, though. The 72 looks like simple doubling.
Pillar of the Community
coppercoins's Avatar
United States
7629 Posts
 Posted 04/21/2008  09:05 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add coppercoins to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Both are Machine Doubling. Flattened down, shelf like, and takes up the normal width of the letters and makes them thinner than they should be.

Basing whether they are doubled dies on what doubled dies are listed is not correct thinking. It's the characteristics on the coin alone that tell one way or the other. If you base whether a coin is a doubled die on what's already listed some place there's no chance you'll recognize a new discovery or an unlisted variety.

Always important - learn what makes them look different. Don't just go by whether your coin compares to a listed variety.
Valued Member
jcuve's Avatar
United States
142 Posts
 Posted 04/21/2008  10:18 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add jcuve to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
When I saw them in person for the first time (yes I bought them, not for a lot but still) I was like oh crap, this isn't right is it?

My reason for uploading images as I felt another set of eyes would be able to let me know if there was something here or not. Apparently not. But it always good to see these things first hand and gain further knowledge for the future.

Over this weekend I have seen a number of similar images of coins like this, well not so much the '70-S, but the '43. It has taking some searching and I wish some of these Mechanical Doubling images were complied somewhere as counter to all the wonderful resources that would point you in the right direction (such as Coppercoins.com!). Maybe there is and I am not aware of it...

It's unfortunate that the coin market is so complicated and there are so many uniformed (and I guess sometime dishonest) sellers and buyers. I can see this forum, and others, have resources that'd keep you in the loop, but I should have joined a while ago as should many, many others.

Thanks for looking at my post and giving some feedback!
Edited by jcuve
04/21/2008 10:19 am
Pillar of the Community
garylcsr's Avatar
United States
1952 Posts
 Posted 04/21/2008  5:27 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add garylcsr to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
on the 43's a lot of them look doubled when they are actually reprocessed. the reprocessing makes them look like a DD but it is just the plating
Gary
Pillar of the Community
TreasHunt's Avatar
United States
2540 Posts
 Posted 04/22/2008  12:50 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add TreasHunt to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Both are MD's.
Nice try.
Better luck next time.
But, keep on looking, ya never know.
Bedrock of the Community
coop's Avatar
United States
62064 Posts
 Posted 04/23/2008  08:20 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add coop to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Again, the proper term is Machine Doubling. There is no such term of "Mechanical Doubling." I like the full description: MDD. It shows what they really are: Machine Doubled Damage.
  Previous TopicReplies: 6 / Views: 979Next Topic  

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.



    




Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Coin Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Family- all rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Coin Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Contact Us  |  Advertise Here  |  Privacy Policy / Terms of Use

Coin Community Forum © 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Forums
It took 0.27 seconds to rattle this change. Forums