Needed: A Discussion Of Modern Doubled Dies

Would the 1984 doubled ear be reclassified? That's just centrally located doubling. Where are you drawing the line?

I was trying to say that the single-squeeze Class VIs don't actually fit into Class VI, they should be in a different, possibly new, class. I was agreeing with you in that they aren't actually Class VI doubled dies.

I think the fundamental issue here is that you believe that a doubled die can only occur if a die is hubbed multiple times intentionally (like in the multiple-squeeze era) but there was an unintentional offset, rotation, or annealing issue causing doubling. I believe that multiple hubbings with one of those issues is possible even when multiple hubbings are not intended. If the working hub is tilted while being pressed into a die blank it will snap into place. That movement can cause a partial secondary hubbing. That is the theory every reference I can find has for the creation of this minor doubling. Because it is a secondary hubbing, it is a doubled die!

Doubled die is a broad label. They aren't caused by one thing, like my earlier example, Class I and Class VI DDs are caused by something different (rotation and annealing issue) but are both labeled doubled die. What they all have in common is that the doubling is made during the creation of a working die that involved the working hub making two or more impressions onto the die blank. The argument that they aren't caused by the same thing means they're not a doubled die doesn't work that well because of that. You'll have to prove that it's not caused by a secondary hubbing, because that's what a doubled die is.

I agree 100% everything that USSID18 is trying to put across to all CCF members .

@ scorpu I agree and your right I have had my fair share of rants (not sure if you were referring to me but I have) albeit not about stuff like this. Some on here are trying to change Numismatics through CCF rants against the most prominent figures in the biz lol

Nice lol scorpu I won't let you down

Tanner got my point, the others have now denigrated into the accusatory mode of me "bashing" the experts.....that was never the intent. The sole purpose is just to point out the facetiousness of a lot of these newer "errors", which really aren't. The 1984 Doubled ear is indeed a hubbing outcome, so no, apples and oranges again. For sake of this discussion lets say 1996 and on is the target dates for what I am referring to.

Conder made the point too, it could REMOTELY be considered "hub" doubling as the die "chattered" when it was made, thereby imprinting on the die. That would then effectively replicate coin upon coin so I will give you that one. My point tho is still on the squeeze method, central areas such as "column doublings. There seems no end to all that are "discovered, and far too many variances among these to be multiple dies being affected. When that chatter occurs during use, anything can happen....that is the flaw, not a doubled error. . The "hobby" has fallen into calling common machining flaws as super-dooper errors, and a short trip through ebay land shows just how far it has gone beyond reason.

That's the current explanation for the doubled columns.




I'm not sure what you mean. Wouldn't there being so many variations mean it is a die-by-die issue rather than a master die/hub or working hub issue?

Do you think this is a striking issue? Because that can easily be debunked by finding multiple coins struck with the same die having identical doubling.

I'm just not getting what you think the alternative is. If not a doubled die, then what? Machining flaw isn't specific whatsoever, or is that a term that means something specific that I just don't know.

I find visible-to-the-eye Machine Doubling a more interesting form of doubling than modern center doubling. Some Machine Doubling can be rather extreme and quite stiking, no pun intended. I assembled a full year set, the business strike years, of machine doubled Kennedy halves. That's the easiest set to complete. The smaller coins are tougher.

The reason the class 9 doubled dies are typically almost always close to the center of the coin is because the die blank is not flat but rather cone shaped so as the hub is squeezed it first makes contact with the hub and begins forming at the center. this is basically the only time the die blank could shift (Later in the squeeze too much of the die and hub would be locked together for it to shift). So if it shift it will be while the center portions are being formed so that is where the doubling will occur.