| Author |
Replies: 10 / Views: 988 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
141 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
The mint mark is part of the design. It is bit a hubbing issue. RPMs stopped with 1989 coins.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
74105 Posts |
It might just be damage from coin contact marks.
Errers and Varietys.
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
141 Posts |
I know the actual mint Mark is suppose to be there. I just thought off to the upper right it looked like another P. Thanks
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4399 Posts |
Likely damage if incuse or a die gouge if raised. Phantom mintmarks were never confirmed to be true varieties (actual RPMs) and are not listed anywhere besides Ken Potter's books. I believe they can be explained by something other than an unlikely, widely-misplaced mintmark punch.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21786 Posts |
If it is a widely displaced mint mark punch, would that qualify the coin as a new variety, not before known?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4399 Posts |
Quote: If it is a widely displaced mint mark punch, would that qualify the coin as a new variety, not before known? Technically it would still be a RPM. But the Roosevelt dime "phantom mintmarks" were never proven to be RPMs. They are not listed by CONECA and Wexler's Roosevelt dime RPM files are virtually nonexistent right now.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
He is not saying that they is no more RPMs for dimes, it is just that through the loss of some of his attributers, they were lost in transit. So he is hoping to find them or start all over again.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
6545 Posts |
Photos way to bright to see anything
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
141 Posts |
So should I not be referencing back to Ken Potters books ? If there are more informed books that would be good for errors, what would you suggest ?
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
To me the Phantom that your are seeing is a stain. It is not raised above the surface like a mint mark should be. Impossible to to be an extra mint mark. Just a stain.
|
| |
Replies: 10 / Views: 988 |
|