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

1953 Large / Small Mint Mark Wheat Penny ?

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 5 / Views: 1,468Next Topic  
Valued Member
sale4coin's Avatar
United States
60 Posts
 Posted 03/18/2021  9:16 pm Show Profile   Bookmark this topic Add sale4coin to your friends list Get a Link to this Message Number of Subscribers
Hi Guys,

I have these two coins in question, I notice the Cud on the 5, but my question is why the different sizes on the S Mint Mark ? Was this a common issue or is the coin a double die ?


1953-Large-/-Small-Mint-Mark-Wheat-Penny-?
1953-Large-/-Small-Mint-Mark-Wheat-Penny-?
1953-Large-/-Small-Mint-Mark-Wheat-Penny-?
1953-Large-/-Small-Mint-Mark-Wheat-Penny-?
1953-Large-/-Small-Mint-Mark-Wheat-Penny-?
Moderator
Learn More...
Dearborn's Avatar
United States
97511 Posts
 Posted 03/18/2021  9:41 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Dearborn to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Well I think that with the 5 it is a chipped die, not a Cud. A Cud will always involve the rim from a broken die

But no idea about the different 's' sizes
Edited by Dearborn
03/18/2021 9:42 pm
Pillar of the Community
Greasy Fingers's Avatar
United States
7068 Posts
 Posted 03/18/2021  10:02 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Greasy Fingers to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Appears to be flattened due to circulation
Moderator
Learn More...
John1's Avatar
United States
56855 Posts
 Posted 03/19/2021  05:00 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add John1 to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
I agree with both replies.
John1
Bedrock of the Community
JimmyD's Avatar
Canada
21634 Posts
 Posted 03/19/2021  07:14 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add JimmyD to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
I think if both photos were the same size, it would make them look much closer in size.
Agree that the second one has been flattened a little more.
Bedrock of the Community
coop's Avatar
United States
62064 Posts
 Posted 03/19/2021  09:22 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add coop to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Also note, the mintmark styles are the same. So they are both normal. The one was punched on the die wider, than the other one. The only times we have large and small mintmarks is when the styles are different:
1953-Large-/-Small-Mint-Mark-Wheat-Penny-?
on the 1946 cents there were also three different styles that year, but not considered small or large, just the mintmark style for each one:
1953-Large-/-Small-Mint-Mark-Wheat-Penny-?
(the ball serif was the more desirable one. Save these if they are in BU)

CoopHome : [/b]Why where there large and small mintmark types?[/b]
Edited by coop
03/19/2021 09:23 am
  Previous TopicReplies: 5 / Views: 1,468Next 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 0.26 seconds to rattle this change. Forums