| Author |
 Replies: 9 / Views: 1,302 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
284 Posts |
This has me a bit baffled. By my logic - for what it's worth - there ought to be either much more or a bit less doubling on the reverse. Wexler's site sent me to Brian's site which sent me away empty-handed. The doubling on the left of the building is pronounced. I deem it to be MD. That said, I think it ought to point east. To me, it appears to point southeast. Direction aside, I don't think MD can be confined to just the building. Maybe it isn't. The MM, at first, appears to be re-punched because it lacks the solid flatness of the building's doubling. Still, I contemplate a possibility that the MM phenomenon and the building phenomenon may be one and the same?I've not worked with minting, but I've worked with machinery since pre-school. Am I wrong to conclude that the coin press could not restrict doubling in this manner? Is it time to blame the working die? The the working hub? I'd like input from a few more experienced diagnosticians, please. Kevin      *** Edited by Staff to clarify topic title. Titles are important! *** |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3207 Posts |
looks like Machine Doubling to me, the side of the building is a popular place for it on nickels of the 50s and 60s |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4846 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
2145 Posts |
Yes, building has classic MD. The mintmark however is different, could it be the D just took a well placed hit(s) to move the metal? The left side of the MM is interesting though.
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
284 Posts |
It seems -- once more -- as if I've entered CCF land where English is not the preferred language. Am I ungrateful? Heavens, No! Is the little old lady grateful to the Boy Scout who helped her across the street? Yes! She's grateful to the kindly lad. But she'd be even more grateful if he'd left her on the side she wanted to be on.
I am as if an investigator on the scene of an air disaster still uncertain as to how the plane met its fate. From CCF, I summoned experience I expected to be superior to my own. Expertise arrived. The findings of my experts are in. One says "Yep, it was an airplane!" Another says "it crashed." The third says "I'm wit dem two!"
I began my quest by indicating that my exploration was analogous to that of an airplane and a mysterious crash. I wrote "The doubling on the left of the building is pronounced. I deem it to be MD." I even sent pictures of the debris field.
"MD" is jargon I come across on the site .It means "machine doubling." I proceeded to point out all the evidence I find that contradicts that conclusion. I then ask my question: "can anyone help me unravel this contradiction?"
Please, no one else tell me what I told you: this looks like MD -- unless you are willing to add risky speculation as to why this MD looks so unlike what one expects MD to look like (that is to say, accompanied by matching MD elsewhere on the planchet). In plain English, that is my quest.
Kevin
Edited by Kcm
12/31/2020 5:25 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4846 Posts |
You're right, I apologize. I confess I hastily looked at the images and skipped your question. I do it more than I should, and I know of others who do as well. Its very easy to get in the mindset of just diagnosing things rather than actually explaining them. I believe your question comes down to "why is there MD on this part of the coin but not other parts when the coin was struck only once? Would MD not affect the entire side of the coin evenly?" The answer to this is no. The amount and substantiality of MD can change from coin to coin. Sometimes, the relief of the affected area is higher than that of the other areas on the coin, so as the die is retracting it only contacts the highest relief portions of the coin. The coin may also be tilted, shifted, or rotated during the return stroke. All of which can change the appearance of MD on a coin. The doubling on monticello is MD for sure. The mintmark looks more like PMD to me. Edited by Adam_E
12/31/2020 6:21 pm
|
|
Valued Member
United States
284 Posts |
How the heck does one like me respond to that?!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3207 Posts |
A good response is to continue to look at more coins and learn. Machine Doubling looks different in different eras because the minting equipment and process changes from time to time. After enough study, not only will you be able to ID the various forms of doubling, but you'll be able to more often than not correctly guess the date of a coin merely by looking at its reverse. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3207 Posts |
One reason you'll see doubling only in certain areas is because the dies are not flat but rather slightly convex. If the coin shifts as soon as the die begins to release after the strike, Machine Doubling will happen nearer the rim than the center, as in your example. If the coin shifts late, Machine Doubling will hapeen nearer the coin's center. If the dies are not perfectly parallel, Machine Doubling can favor left or right, etc. |
|
Valued Member
United States
284 Posts |
These last offerings are golden to my cause. I can easily buy into the explanation that this device (the mansion) might protrude to a degree not shared by the other devices and therefore remained in contact with the die after the others had cleared. It makes even more sense given that this is the anvil die. The hammer die long departed. I'm especially pleased to be warned to attend to the conical condition of blank dies before hubbing. I'll not repeat my mistake in future. All This will be in tow the next time I look at a coin - and I have many thousands waiting to be looked at. Having one more answer and one less question helps me a lot.
I came here to be taught. I'm indebted to my teachers.
That MM still vexes though. It looks like a D over and west of another D, the topmost D almost decapitated by a hit. I checked NGC Variety-plus, Wexler, and PCGS, to no avail. I finally found three '52 RPM varieties on Variety Vista, but nothing close to what's here - no westerly trending. Some folks don't believe in Santa Claus. I don't believe in new discoveries on old coins. Still, I'd love to own a working theory on this that's as useful as that you people have just given.
Kevin
|
| |
Replies: 9 / Views: 1,302 |
|
Posted 12/31/2020 1:46 pm
