| Author |
 Replies: 20 / Views: 1,697 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2731 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
509 Posts |
I don't believe this is any type of RPM. It appears that the posts of the mm on the die are partially broken or damaged thus causing what you are seeing.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
2731 Posts |
Quote:
I don't believe this is any type of RPM. It appears that the posts of the mm on the die are partially broken or damaged thus causing what you are seeing. Thanks, I thought that at first as well Bumpkin but I believe that broken MM was on the later 70's coins and involved the Denver MM's. There are other indicators besides the split that point to it being a RPM as well I believe. We'll see what some others say. "Pride is yoked with callous behavior, as humility is with compassion." St. Gregory Palamas Top Finds - 1969-S 1c FS-101 http://goccf.com/t/477681 1976 D WQ FS-101 http://goccf.com/t/382777 - 1968 D 1c FS-801 http://goccf.com/t/422254Cool clashed dies - 1972 D 1c http://goccf.com/t/429855&SearchTerms=CCLStruck-In Rim Burr - 1969 S 1c http://goccf.com/t/425587&SearchTerms=burrFloating (Type II) Counterclash - 1978 D 1c http://goccf.com/t/434991&SearchTerms=1978 |
|
Moderator
 United States
34410 Posts |
It is intriguing, but I'm not sure that it is a RPM either. Maybe consider sending it in?
"If you climb a good tree, you get a push."
-----Ghanaian proverb
"The danger we all now face is distinguishing between what is authentic and what is performed."
-----King Adz
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
8751 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2731 Posts |
Thank you Makecents, I had read that a while back and forgot.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
509 Posts |
Hello CoinHI. I had forgotten about the good tutorial on Lincolncentresource.com Here is the link that explains the different S mint mark styles for each year. Yours appears to be about an exact match with MMS-009 which was used on the 1974 business strikes. For some reason the great picture you supplied of the closeup did not load on my computer last night. Now that I see that very good closeup pic of the mm I can see what you are referring to as the split but I think it is consistent with MMS-009. Hope this helps. http://www.lincolncentresource.com/..._Styles.html |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
Note the design is normal in size, just a contact mark on the mintmark.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8751 Posts |
Quote:
Thank you Makecents, I had read that a while back and forgot. You are welcome. If I had not been around for it's conception, (second hand anyway), I may have not been as familiar with it. Will's theory came about, I think around three years ago and then, after collecting many BU coins and data, did a study that lasted for a few months. He put this together with Ray's fantastic pictorial and sent to Dr. Wiles. Between Will's work and Ray's pics, I don't think it was tough for Dr. Wiles to come to his own conclusions. It was cool to watch this transpire, before it was mainstream. -makecents-
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2731 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
No those two are different RPM. Look at the top serifs on those images. On is slight different than the other on the upper serif.  Edited by coop
08/24/2021 11:58 am
|
|
New Member
United States
13 Posts |
I'm actually researching the same! Found one yesterday that's in gorgeous shape but was confused when I couldn't find any RPM list. Here's only info I did find.... I thought RMP, but apparently the actual punch itself was Re-Punched when they transitioned between mint mark styles that year? Atleast, that's what I got from the article. Kinda got my attention when it said it maybe only known instance of a Re-Punched punch. Lol. Just curious as to how someone concluded that... Maybe because of the transition between mark styles that year maybe? http://varietyvista.com/25%20What%2...201974-S.htm |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
Reading that link just gave me a headache. Wexler lost most of the RPM files for Roosevelt dimes. So if you have any, you might check to see if he would like to see them? |
|
New Member
United States
13 Posts |
While I'm thinking of it, mine is very light in color. It's just a lighter shade of bronze than I'm used to seeing on red Lincoln's from the 70's. I started to think my example was improperly cleaned. But yours kinda seems like it too... I posted last night about exactly this same thing. My camera sucks, but mine's definitely a match. If I come up with any info, I'll chime in here too. http://goccf.com/t/406313 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8751 Posts |
I was not trying to confuse the situation. The link I gave you, in a nutshell, is about the fact that MMS-009,(used 1974-1979) and MMS-004(used 1941-1942 & 1945-1952), are the same punch. By the time it was picked up and used again, in 1974, it was a well used punch, that had already developed a lot of "character" and continued to do so, through use. Much of what it developed over that time, has been mistaken for RPM's. Hope that helps. Link to MM styles. http://www.varietyvista.com/01a%20L...20Styles.htm-makecents-
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2731 Posts |
Makecents- The confusing part for me is the article on VV states this punch was used on 1975 S Dimes (Proof). On VV also lists two RPM's for the 1975-S Dimes and there is even a "FS-501". Now looking at these RPM's, see Coop's post above, we can see the same identifiers on this punch, namely that there isn't a bottom split. VV also acknowledges that MMS-005 is the same as MMS-002 for dimes.
|
| |
Replies: 20 / Views: 1,697 |
Posted 08/23/2021 03:06 am
