2015 25 Cents, Exaggerated Doubling On Reverse Opinions

Looks like strong Die Deterioration Doubling.

Thank you Roger & JimmyD, that is what I suspected, I appreciate the clarification. Given the lack of information online regarding the ones on coins and canada I assumed it probably wasn't anything of real interest as if it were, I'm sure there would have been more talk regarding it.

Found this 2016 25 cent a while ago. I was so sure it was a doubled die until I saw this post. Die Deterioration is probably right, I see a lot of die flow on OP's coin and the doubling doesn't match the shape of the numbers all too well.

It does remind me a lot of Class II+VI doubled dies, but that type of doubling is no longer possible with the single-squeeze hubbing process. That type of doubling is only known on dies made with multiple squeezes.

Does Canada use the single-squeeze hubbing process? Is it still possible for a Canadian die to be made with multiple squeezes? How good is quality control in regards to die hubbing up there?

No. It is almost always radial in form from the centre of the coin to the rim, and most exaggerated closest to the rim. The beads speak volumes to me, as Die Deterioration.

Although I see your point, As far as I am aware genuine doubling does not come in as many stages as Die Deterioration, But who's to say Die Deterioration doesn't work differently on different denominations, on Pennies it could be in all sorts of stages, while on Quarters could only be one or two stages.

I have the exact same 2016 quarter as the one Tanman2001 posted, but mine does not show the doubling on the Caribous hairs like his, which to me means that mine could very well be an earlier Die Deterioration state compared to his. So my logic for the quarters is that the mint let these dies go for a bit longer than they should have (for numerous years from 2012) to a certain point before the deterioration became too severe, all resulting in what we are looking at now.

To the best of my understanding genuine doubling has distinctive separation in the devices, which makes you see Double and Die Deterioration looks like it is "Pushed" or "Sliding". I have taken the liberty of drawing up a quick illustration of what I think the differences are.




This illustration is not just restricted to the beads, this can be implemented to the affects of one device or all devices on the Obverse or Reverse of a coin, I think the logic is still the same.

Although some look at Die Deterioration as a valid form of Doubling it should be noted that it is not the type of Doubling that is sought after as it is the result of an overused die. I would much rather have a genuine doubled die over a Die Deterioration double but that is my own personal preference and I'm sure some still collect them anyways.

I was exactly like Tanman2001 and I was sure this was a doubled die, until I looked at the beads and started questioning it. I mainly focus on Small Cent doubled dies and I don't venture off into the quarters as often as I should so I was not 100% confident in this one being anything more than Die Deterioration as I am with the smaller cents, but 9 times out of 10 if SPP-Ottawa says its Die Deterioration you can take that to the bank, He knows his stuff and has helped me plenty of times.

I think when it comes to the nickels the Die Deterioration will always be on the bottom of the devices due to the location of the date being at the bottom of the coin, when it comes to quarters since the dates are located at the top right it only makes sense for the Die Deterioration to be on top of the devices, also the lack of notching on the devices leads me to believe this is nothing more than Die Deterioration, if you take a look at this Part 2 illustration I drew up you will see exactly what I mean.




again this illustration can be implemented on one device, or all devices on the Obverse or Reverse of a coin as the logic is still the same, Hub Doubled = Notching/Splits on devices and Die Deterioration = Extra thickness and No notching or splits. That is my understanding but I have been wrong before.

As much as I hoped this was a genuine doubled die, the evidence leads me to believe it is nothing more than just Die Deterioration.

I agree it is odd that it only seems to have one stage and no examples are being shown of this Deterioration progressing, but it does not really change my mind on what it is. I have a growing collection of genuine doubled dies, and this looks nothing like those.

The last photo of that 2012 speaks volumes. All the doubling is outwards, toward the rim. Doubled dies usually have elements either on the same trajectory or on a rotational vector.

Secondly, how do you explain the offset being more on the top of the number two, than on the base of the same number. The offset is consistent on a real doubled die.

I don't have the coin in hand, but I remain unconvinced of a doubled die.

It has all the characteristics of class II doubling.

"Class II hub doubling is most often characterized by doubling that parallels the outside edges of the devices closest to the rim. The two primary requirements are that the spread be directly toward or away from the rim (without rotation or pivot) and that there be clear separation lines in the doubling"
reference: http://www.error-ref.com/doubled-dies/

I know that most will say it is not possible to get this type of doubling using single squeeze hubbing process, will in fact, originally, no doubled die was supposed to exists under that process!

Funny, there is a new class of doubling called Peripheral Doubling trying to explain the occurrence of different types of doubled die observed in recent years.( http://www.error-ref.com/peripheral-doubling/ )

More than ever we have encountered doubled dies on recent coins, for example 2012 loonie, 2013 PL set, 2013 nickel, etc... So call it what you want ie. a subset of Class II doubling or an addition to peripheral doubling, that is how I am explaining it.

How would you classify these antlers found on the 2012 quarter?



Thank you SPP for the picture of DDD occurring on the penny. My conclusion, no quarters shown has those distinct metal flow lines!

From experience, DDD on recent coins looks more like mortar set to me, just look at this 2008 nickel which clearly shows strong DDD. This is not what I am observing on these quarter!