Coin Community Family of Web Sites Join Thousands of Coin, Bullion, & Money Collectors
Royal Canadian Mint products, Canadian, Polish, American, and world coins and banknotes. 300,000 items to help build your collection! Specializing in Modern Numismatics Coin, Banknote and Medal Collectors's Online Mall Join Thousands of Coin, Bullion, & Money Collectors Vancouvers #1 Coin and Paper Money Dealer Royal Estate Auctions - $1 Coin Auctions








Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?


This page may contain links that result in small commissions to keep this free site up and running.

Welcome Guest! Registering and/or logging in will remove the anchor (bottom) ads. It's Free!

Another 2000 Lincoln Memorial Cent With A Am Separation, Not Proof Reverse

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 8 / Views: 1,049Next Topic  
Pillar of the Community
chuckster 125's Avatar
United States
4113 Posts
 Posted 12/15/2008  1:09 pm Show Profile   Bookmark this topic Add chuckster 125 to your friends list Get a Link to this Message Number of Subscribers
This is the second one I found- I know it's not a 2000 Wide AM, Type 1 Proof, but there is a slight gap between the A & M -"on a business strike"- the initials FG are away from the base.

Anyway- check the pics and tell me what you all think- again, maybe a "NEW FIND"? or just die wear again, etc.
Another-2000-Lincoln-Memorial-Cent-With-A-Am-Separation,-Not-Proof-Reverse Another-2000-Lincoln-Memorial-Cent-With-A-Am-Separation,-Not-Proof-Reverse Another-2000-Lincoln-Memorial-Cent-With-A-Am-Separation,-Not-Proof-Reverse Another-2000-Lincoln-Memorial-Cent-With-A-Am-Separation,-Not-Proof-Reverse Another-2000-Lincoln-Memorial-Cent-With-A-Am-Separation,-Not-Proof-Reverse Another-2000-Lincoln-Memorial-Cent-With-A-Am-Separation,-Not-Proof-Reverse

*Some pics of one of my legit 2000 Wide AM cents for comparison*
Another-2000-Lincoln-Memorial-Cent-With-A-Am-Separation,-Not-Proof-Reverse Another-2000-Lincoln-Memorial-Cent-With-A-Am-Separation,-Not-Proof-Reverse Another-2000-Lincoln-Memorial-Cent-With-A-Am-Separation,-Not-Proof-Reverse Another-2000-Lincoln-Memorial-Cent-With-A-Am-Separation,-Not-Proof-Reverse
Pillar of the Community
Kloccwork419's Avatar
United States
1359 Posts
 Posted 12/15/2008  1:58 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Kloccwork419 to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
There wer different dies. if you made the left leg of the M the same width as the right,They would touch.
The true Wide AM is the proff reverse that you can ALWAYS tell by the initials
Pillar of the Community
chuckster 125's Avatar
United States
4113 Posts
 Posted 12/15/2008  3:08 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add chuckster 125 to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
I agree the left leg is thinner, but it is also thinner on the Valid Wide AM.

You are right, its 2 separate dies, but is this a valid separation of the A&M on this Business Strike Reverse coin, or is it wear etc?

I'm trying to see if you can have a 2000 Cent with a separation of the A & M and be a Business Strike, not the Proof Reverse (New Find?)


Thanks.
Edited by chuckster 125
12/15/2008 3:16 pm
Pillar of the Community
KurtS's Avatar
United States
5318 Posts
 Posted 12/15/2008  8:11 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add KurtS to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Hi, this is the normal business strike " Close AM".
The initial position is a confirmation, as is the shape of the A.
Comparing to your pic, the " Wide AM" variety has the M in AMERICA about equally centered between A and E.

Another-2000-Lincoln-Memorial-Cent-With-A-Am-Separation,-Not-Proof-Reverse

2000 Wide AM for comparison:
Another-2000-Lincoln-Memorial-Cent-With-A-Am-Separation,-Not-Proof-Reverse

As Jason noted, designer initial position confirms this is a Close AM.
Another-2000-Lincoln-Memorial-Cent-With-A-Am-Separation,-Not-Proof-Reverse
Pillar of the Community
chuckster 125's Avatar
United States
4113 Posts
 Posted 12/15/2008  8:37 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add chuckster 125 to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Hi Kurt:

Knowing that this is a normal business strike " Close AM"- why the separation of the A&M?

That's what I'm trying to find out- a normal business strike " Close AM" but it has a separated A&M. Why? normal wear or NEW FIND?
Edited by chuckster 125
12/15/2008 8:40 pm
Pillar of the Community
KurtS's Avatar
United States
5318 Posts
 Posted 12/15/2008  8:45 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add KurtS to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
I'm hardly an expert on these, but I've been told the AM distance depends on how the die was made or perhaps polished during the run.
If they needed to remove a die clash, the die would get polished down which further separates the letters.
As far as I've read, there is no intermediary reverse hub type; only Close AM or the Wide AM meant for proofs--what do others say?
Pillar of the Community
chuckster 125's Avatar
United States
4113 Posts
 Posted 12/15/2008  8:49 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add chuckster 125 to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Thanks again for your help.



Pillar of the Community
coppercoins's Avatar
United States
7629 Posts
 Posted 12/15/2008  9:11 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add coppercoins to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Chuckster...

Your coin, and a lot of other coins suffer from a number of different things that cause the A and M to have a small gap between them.

1. Excessive die polishing - which your coin has. Letters on coins are trapezoid shaped with beveled edges. When you remove the field behind the letters, they become shorter in relief and more distant from one another.

2. Excessive die wear - which your coin also has. Die wear tends to eat away at the corners of sharp letters making them a bit mushy. This can separate letters that would normally touch.

3. Weak hubbing - which your coin might have. When dies are not hubbed strongly enough, some of the letters that have shallow connections (like the A and M on Close AM cents) can be missing this shallow connection.

Bottom line is this: There were TWO designs used on some 1992, 1998, 1999, and 2000 cents (and possibly other years too). These two designs are very different from one another if you look very closely at the details:

1. The most obvoius, the gap between the A and M.
2. The designer's initials are moved farther away from the base on the newer Close AM design.
3. The "TAT" of "STATES" is spaced differently between the two designs. On the older, Wide AM design, they are equidistant from one another. The A is half way between the two Ts. On the newer Close AM design, the A is closer to the right T than to the left T.

There are numerous other minute details that are different between the two designs, but these are some of the more readily visible differences.

Point is, though...there are but TWO designs. There is no magic partial Wide AM transition design. All the Close AM coins you are finding with mild separation between the two letters have ALL the other characteristics of the Close AM design. So they are Close AM coins. End of story. That's the blunt truth.

I hope you find this helpful.
Pillar of the Community
chuckster 125's Avatar
United States
4113 Posts
 Posted 12/15/2008  9:21 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add chuckster 125 to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
YEP!

Thanks Chuck,

Closed Case- There is no "THIRD" Design
  Previous TopicReplies: 8 / Views: 1,049Next Topic  

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.



    




Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Coin Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Family- all rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Coin Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Contact Us  |  Advertise Here  |  Privacy Policy / Terms of Use

Coin Community Forum © 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Forums
It took 0.32 seconds to rattle this change. Forums