| Author |
 Replies: 8 / Views: 1,594 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3237 Posts |
Last week I found a 1996 DDO-001 in my second ever penny box coin roll hunt http://goccf.com/t/372066. Am I seeing things, or did I seriously just find DDO-002 in my third ever box? From what I've seen, both varieties are super scarce, so if it is, I must just be a magnet for 1996 varieties lol   Edited by SamCoin
04/28/2020 12:01 pm
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6108 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
3237 Posts |
The doubling on liberty seems to match up to me. I'm definitely seeing the little tips poking up on the top of the L and I, and the B and E are a bit smushed, but also look like a match!
Edit: Think I'm seeing the "BIE" too under that small patch of verdigris/zinc rot.
Edited by SamCoin
04/28/2020 12:22 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5887 Posts |
Your coin's devices do not look enlarged, they look reduced. This could be the result of a polished die and circulation damage. For that reason, I say it's not DDO-002. Keep hunting!
-CH27
Collector of U.S. Coins, Varieties, and Colonial Coinage
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3237 Posts |
Looks very consistent with the way the devices were enlarged on the DDO-001 I found last week, CH27. Not trying to be argumentative, but almost sure I see a spread to the north on Liberty, particularly the tips of the L and I.
Edited by SamCoin
04/28/2020 12:43 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5887 Posts |
I understand what you see, however the Devices on your coin are too small to be DDO-002. Take a look at a normal 1996. The devices on a well struck example will be larger than your coin-not because it is a doubled die, but because your coin has reduced devices rather than normal sized. The shape of those devices could be the cause of die polishing, circulation damage, grease on the die, etc. If you compare your DDO-001 to this coin, you can see how much smaller the devices are on this coin than those of the DDO-001. You can always form your own opinion, but this is just my Two Cents.  -CH27 Collector of U.S. Coins, Varieties, and Colonial Coinage
Edited by CoinHunter27
04/28/2020 1:01 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3237 Posts |
Thanks CoinHunter. I certainly see what you're saying, but I'm also seeing what appears to be a residual trace of the separation line on the top tip of the curl in the second 9. I'm certainly not sure it's DDO-002, but I'm not completely convinced it isn't yet either. I'll wait to see if there's more of a consensus on your side before I toss it. Hard to capture the separation line I'm seeing as it's very faint, but here's another photo.  Edited by SamCoin
04/28/2020 1:22 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10635 Posts |
I agree with CH27, your coin's devices look reduced, not enlarged. The devices look too small to be DDO-002 to me.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3237 Posts |
After taking a closer look at the picture TropicalBats posted, I'm noticing that the width of the devices in certain areas is partially an optical illusion (particularly the stem of the second 9). The wide parts are only present at the shallowest relief. These areas show up as slightly pinkish in the picture he posted, and would have been the first thing removed from the design in later die states due to polishing, which would have left a coin that looks exactly like the one I found. Even the skinny part of the second 9 matches up perfectly with the width of the higher relief elements of the second 9 that would be left if you polished the die.
Since there's no evidence of strong MD, I can't see any other reason why certain parts of the design would be so wide while others are so narrow on the coin I found. Granted, thinning of the devices is usually associated with MD, but I see no evidence of that here, and the shape of the date is a perfect match for what would be left after polishing the die.
Edited by SamCoin
04/29/2020 01:46 am
|
| |
Replies: 8 / Views: 1,594 |
|
Posted 04/28/2020 12:19 pm
