| Author |
 Replies: 20 / Views: 1,909 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2111 Posts |
Today I have been CRH 1968S LMC I purchased on ebay. Found this interesting looking S mint mark. Vista has an RPM-001 that looks the closest, yet maybe not so much. So what do you all think? Could this be a different RPM Vista doesn't have? To me its an interesting S mint mark.     "LOVE THE HUNT!"
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
713 Posts |
Firstly, let me say those close-ups are incredibly clear -- Very nice.
Definitely appears to be an RPM but not in a position to verify. I'm sure others will be along to do so.
edit: would be thoughtful to put up a link; the overlay for #1 looks to be correct; I find it odd that coppercoins does not have an example of this variety
Edited by CentSation
08/03/2022 10:13 pm
|
|
Moderator
 United States
96730 Posts |
Very nice RPM Arby! Great pictures of it too.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
2111 Posts |
Dearborn, I can't find that one on Variety Vista, Its close to RPM-001, yet can't confirm that. Those Photos are not very good. What do you think?
"LOVE THE HUNT!"
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
6244 Posts |
@ARBY, I saw the both RPM's recognized at this moment and do not fit with you coin. For me the photos are OK and I can see.
Me I see here more a small MD. Look at the orientation of the marks. All same direction and complete vertical axes. In those years the MM was punch on the master die separately from the date (year). Was use an "punch" which in general has the tendencies to move East and on rebound created the RPM. the direction of RPM is not in cement because was direct proportional with the tech who fix the MM punch (3 screws) equal force. All those are fund in Mint reports from the Essay labs facilities.
My conclusion is MD very small and hope will be contraire and you to have a new RPM for this year.
Edited by silviosi
08/04/2022 03:57 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3402 Posts |
I'm supporting the RPM group...the second "S" shows rounding, not flatness as it would be with MD.
KK
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
But to be the real deal, we need to see the tops of the date to see if they look like the same thing. If it looks like this mintmark, then it is a normal coin. So I need to see the tops of the date devices to know for sure what is going on here. I need an image of the full date and mintmark area to make a determination if this is a RPM, or not.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2111 Posts |
Here you go Coop, I took two photos one upside down and rotated it right side up, one right side up to see the how it looks with the light striking the coin differently. Hope these photos help. My Question is this a double Die Obverse with how the date looks?   "LOVE THE HUNT!"
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
3328 Posts |
With the close ups on the MM I am on the RPM side, it could be an RPM that also has MD, the mint mark seems to have 2 sets of doubling to me where the rest of the coin shows clear MD. I'll say it's an RPM that has MD as well. Just look at the MM and see there is two sets of doubling one is flatter then the other, the rest of the date has the same MD or even possible DDD but the MM is the only thing with 2 sets of doubling... So RPM-001 with MD on top possibly? I don't normal comment on rpms. Edit: was there a master hub doubling for this year? The 6 appears to have doubling almost like a doubled die. Edited by Wrekkdd
08/04/2022 4:16 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
6244 Posts |
Thanks Arby for the second set of the photos. I feel bad to say IMO is not an RPM. I was glad to see a new one come out. This is my opinion after I see the date. The date and the MM show me all NNE.
@Kopper: I have now idea from which folklore you state the one is flat and other is round? In 68 in San Francisco use vertical presses. Each strike has an small rebound from the floor elasticity which can contribute to an very minors MD. To day they use horizontal presses, which eliminate all those contra forces of the strike. (Mint processes)
Edited by silviosi
08/04/2022 6:07 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2111 Posts |
Silviosi, Thank you for the information, I have to go by what others tell me. I am no expert by any means. The conflicting opinions are confusing and that is why I find this hobby so frustrating. One can post a coin on three different sites and get three different opinions. When I look at photos on Variety Vista of DDO and DDR one can't see what doubling is on the photos. When one does see some photos, some of those photos look like Mechanical Doubling that goes the same as RPM's. It can be so frustration. One thing I like about this site one gets good information without snide remarks and individuals being rude. It truly appears everyone is trying to help, and I do appreciate that. This is the first time I have ever seen this type of MD. I wish they all were like the 1955 LMC a little more or a little less. There are way to many types of doubling out there and really no where to go to seek assistance quickly, without spending lots of $$$$$. Thanks again. I have several more 1968S that appear to possibility be RPM's We will see!  oops   "LOVE THE HUNT!"
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
3328 Posts |
I'm probably wrong and have much less experience with RPMs but the mint mark is still the only thing in any photos showing a double split I'm the design. MD is obviouse in the date and MM but the MM shows 2 seperate forms of doubling the rest of the close ups I only see one. "Bounce" doubling would be apparent on all devices so why is it just the mint mark showing two seperate forms of doubling?
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
I'm seeing Machine Doubling on the date and the mintmark in the same direction. Normal coin. The 1968-1972 had a lot of Machine Doubling. Even the doubled dies had Machine Doubling on the 1969-S DDO's.  How can you tell which is which? On the DDO, that is on the die. The mintmarks are added to the dies in a different process:  So when you see the Machine Doubling and mintmark doubling in the same direction it is Machine Doubling. The images of the 69-S shows there is a DDO, but the mintmarks are normal, but both the date and the mintmark have the same direction of Machine Doubling. Working up the images for this coin helped me see that the Machine Doubling is very slight. Part of what we are seeing is part of the normal device, but the arrows I added show how slight the Machine Doubling actually is:    CoopHome: Is it true that a doubled die would not have the same direction of a RPM? True So far none have been found. There are doubled variety coins with a DDO and a RPM, but not in the same direction. I would save this coin as an educational piece to show to new collectors you meet. Edited by coop
08/05/2022 1:28 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
6244 Posts |
Thanks COOP. One think, the photo from Wexler show how the MM was punch till mid 50's with goldsmith tools. After those punches was insert in a press, no more the grip ball used. The presses with the stand was adjusted by the engravers which give us different location and also different directions of the MM.
Thanks for a so nice explanation.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2111 Posts |
Coop awesome photos references you created, I pulled two of these that I pulled that are almost identical. Learning everyday.!
"LOVE THE HUNT!"
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
3328 Posts |
Even with the explanation from coop I'm still not convinced. Most of the photos looks like obviouse MD, the mint mark is the only thing I see showing a double step(two forms of doubling). It is as clear as day...look at the MM and tell me there is not a "double step" the rest of the devices just show MD(single step)
Edit: the 9 in the date actually shows 2 steps but in the opposite direction of the mint marks secondary doubling.
Edited by Wrekkdd
08/05/2022 8:00 pm
|
| |
Replies: 20 / Views: 1,909 |
Posted 08/03/2022 11:14 pm
Uncirculated American Silver Eagles 
