| Author |
 Replies: 17 / Views: 1,994 |
|
New Member
United States
45 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
6244 Posts |
Me I do not see the wddo-001 on this coin. I do not see the spread to the center and also no Die gauche under the I in Liberty. The reverse is other story. IMHO is WRPM-002 I try to work with your photo and look like this I will post. First R and second one put me questions.(in fact a close image clear of the words "quarter dollar" is need to pronounce. Is MD all? or some Hub Doubling? or mixt with DDR unknow yet?  |
|
Moderator
 United States
56855 Posts |
|
|
New Member
 United States
45 Posts |
@ Silviosi - I agree, RPM for sure, was just unsure about the spread on "Quarter Dollar" as well. Thanks for taking a look and giving your opinion. I see you do a lot of quarter related topics.
@ John - MD is possible and I will investigate it further. I appreciate your response. Thank you!
|
|
Moderator
United States
56855 Posts |
|
|
New Member
United States
45 Posts |
|
|
Moderator
United States
56855 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
6244 Posts |
For the MM: D/D/D West & Tilted (Rotated) Wexler and D/D South VV. IMHO fit more with Wexler WRPM-002 then the VV RPM-003. The Die scrach on the right wing (eagle) and Left wing as we see it is characteristic for almost all quarters business strike till 1987. For Quarter Dollard: I see a CCW rotation W to E for RTER and DO and right end of the branches. The LLA show more linear tilt and the R it is correct as the QU. For this reason I mention could be an combination of the Hub Doubling which will give DDR and the MD. I look at this quarter Reverse from the perspective of the Type A which use the Master Hub from 1932. For one reason or other, during the period of 1943 till 1948 the use the 1932 and 1938 Hub Design. This coin it is the 1932 Reverse Design with no doubt. PS: Very interesting and constructive learning discussion on this post and Thanks JOHN1 to accept to be involve. Edited by silviosi
12/18/2022 5:12 pm
|
|
New Member
United States
45 Posts |
@ John, thank you very much! Very interesting, and great information. Those are all great examples and I'm reading through them right now. I appreciate the information and your time sir.
@ silviosi, I appreciate your time, research and perspective as well. That is very interesting information that you posted. I will be going down that rabbit hole.
Thanks again to the both of you and I look forward to your input in the near future.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4396 Posts |
I agree with John, this appears to be entirely Machine Doubling. The mintmark has decreased in size due to the shift creating the MD. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
6244 Posts |
This time I have to disagree with TAN and stand with my tough.
The re-punch MM has not necessary same characteristics as the letters or other design part doubling. Why?:
Because the MM in that time was punch manually on the Working Hub (contrary as the folklore believe on the working Dies). Mint Eva Adams director (report to the Congress June 1964). Why RPM?: this mint variety has 2 factors:
1. engraving the punch - error of the Engraver
2. Punching the Hub (always 2 time) small miss attention or hand shaking of the worker (goldsmith)
Conclusion: the proprieties of the rest of doubling could not apply at 100% to the manually MM punch. In my study for the Quarters I find that we have 50 - 50 the percent of this similarity and hundreds and hundreds of different positions and orientations.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4396 Posts |
Wouldn't the mintmark be raised on the hub? (As opposed to incuse on the die)
How is a raised punch possible?
Do you have a link to this report? This is the first I've heard of this and 99.9% of people say the opposite.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
It is Machine Doubling. Note the affected area is where the contour of the mintmark was removed. When looking at the full mintmark, it is reduced with Machine Doubling. http://www.varietyvista.com/09b%20W...201947-D.htmNote the RPMs are showing an extra punch. An extra punch is raised, not incuse. Also the width/height will be affected. Note the three examples on the side. 001 Is a North 002 is an East 003 is a South Note the normal size of the mintmark on these examples? If it the same over all size of the Machine doubled contour flattening. In order to be a RPM, there will be evidence of a second punch. The OP's coin does not show a second punch, just contour removal with Machine Doubling. Take a second look. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
6244 Posts |
@ TAN I will look for report and PM to you. All the MM punches was incuse on theirs strike surface, so they can create the MM to be rise.
@ COOP, It is rise on this coin. I agree with you point of view. The coin must be see in hand.
|
|
Moderator
United States
95443 Posts |
A bit late to this party, but, yes, MD seems to be the general consent here.
|
|
New Member
United States
45 Posts |
Hello all, I should've included these pics when uploading pics the first time. I will be getting a new scope soon to upload better pics. But I found more doubling on the reverse. Even if it turns out to be MD, it serves as a good example.    Edited by Melo30
01/12/2023 10:51 pm
|
| |
Replies: 17 / Views: 1,994 |
Posted 12/18/2022 04:21 am
