| Author |
 Replies: 13 / Views: 965 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5240 Posts |
My question is this, if there werent any design change from one year to the next would the same dies be used if not worn the next year? Edited by Jim0815
05/24/2019 2:32 pm
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
74846 Posts |
Jim, good question! I think they do it sometimes.
Errers and Varietys.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1602 Posts |
Jim, just to clarify, are you talking about the dies used to strike reverse proofs or the more common dies used to strike the reverse side of circulating coins?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
5240 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1602 Posts |
In the interest of seigniorage, I'd see no reason not to do so.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
Using the wrong hubs was the problem on the 1998-2000 LMC reverses. Some proof dies were hubbed with the wrong hub design also. (After 1993 when business strike and proof coins had the new reverses, the 1994 business strike cents had the RDV-007 reverses. The proof coins were hubbed with RDV-006 hubs until 2008. http://www.varietyvista.com/01b%20L...arieties.htmSo when the mix up happened in 1998-2000 on the business strike coins, they were hubbed with the RDV-006. instead of the RDV-007 hubs. On the 1998 and 1999 on the proof dies, they used the RDV-007 hub on some dies instead of the RDV-006 hubs. Thus the big mix up those years.   But most of the time they got it right. After 1994 they couldn't use the retired proof dies as they had the incorrect design. So I think they tried not reuse them. Before on the 1959-1992 coinage, they could, but I don't remember anything mentioned about this happening. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2624 Posts |
Question: Would the 1998,1999,2000 all be wrong reverse errors?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1667 Posts |
Yes DrDon. It's why those years have a " Wide AM" version of the reverse out there to find, but not all of them struck those years were like that, just some of the coins in those years. The others have the intended reverse. Edited by Big-Kingdom
05/24/2019 8:09 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2624 Posts |
I understand how they came to be. My point is that they are errors not varieties.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
The answer is, Yes. It was and probably still is common practice at the mint. For example in Roger Burdette's book on proofs there are several case documented of proof reverse dies being used in two consecutive years. If you have a perfectly good non-dated rev die why destroy it and then make a new die exactly like it?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5240 Posts |
Condor, I can sure see that. The reason I asked was I have a '59 and '60 that the reverses look strikingly similar to each other.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3181 Posts |
We want pics Jim!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5240 Posts |
Tunnioc, I have no pics on this one just a question. The reason I asked it was I have a 59 and a 60 and the reverses showed similar die markers in the third bay and although not a complete match it just crossed my mind to post the question.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
The mark on the third bay is part of a die clash. These are the most common clash.
|
| |
Replies: 13 / Views: 965 |
|
Posted 05/24/2019 3:32 pm
