| Author |
Replies: 10 / Views: 1,244 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
939 Posts |
Edited by Coppergold 11/29/2017 4:42 pm
|
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
56855 Posts |
Neither one looks like a woody to me. I don't think that is a LAM either,maybe just a scrape. Need close ups.Both also look cleaned. John1 
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1901 Posts |
The 42 almost looks woodie on the obverse but that's all I am seeing
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
18456 Posts |
The both of them are not woodies . The 31 is in nice condition but it looks cleaned . The 42 obverse is decent ,reverse a little shabby . Also no lamination that I can see . 
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5964 Posts |
 with all the above.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
I don't think they qualify as woodies either. 
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2376 Posts |
I wouldn't set ether aside as woodies even though there is a bit striation peaking through. The 31 is a class VI DDR . Very nice thick stalks on the wheats was well as nice distortion on the O in OF. The bottom of the first A in America is also nicely distorted.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
939 Posts |
I thought for sure that 42 would be one because it has the same look to the one in the error reference..  Meh.. tough luck. At least I got a nice year with the 31. One I didn't have
|
|
Moderator
 United States
189502 Posts |
Neither are woody, but still nice to find. 
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
I can understand your confusion. But even if the '42 is a woodie by some definition, it's not the sort of woodie that most collectors are looking for. 
|
|
Valued Member
United States
63 Posts |
Each looks to have a small rim Cud you might explore further.
|
| |
Replies: 10 / Views: 1,244 |
|