| Author |
 Replies: 11 / Views: 1,598 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
864 Posts |
Looks like two 1989 D's here. Am I wrong?  |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7629 Posts |
Die wear. The doubling must have "character" - in other words, it must look just like the primary devices for the doubling to have been on the die before the coins were made. You really should get a couple of doubled dies so you will know exactly what you're looking for.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
If you are referring to seeming D between the 8 and the top of the mint mark. It is not the right size and shape to be a miss punch. It just something that looks interesting, but is not what you think.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
864 Posts |
Thanks for your feedback and suggestion Coppercoins and Coop! What I'm looking at is another date and MM shifted towards the rim and a bit downward from the main strikes of them. I hadn't been looking at or seeing anything between the D and the 8. If you look through a magnifying glass at the image I posted you might see more of a definate separate full looking date under the main strike, to see what I'm on about and why I would think its another date showing. Honest mistake to think it might be even if it isn't in the end  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7629 Posts |
Another thing to remember is that the date and mintmarks were placed into the die during completely separate processes until 1990. Any coin prior to that date would never have the same doubling on both the date and the mintmark unless it were a worthless form of Machine Doubling. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3592 Posts |
MD seems to be pretty common on 1988 & 1989 cents for some reason.I'm seeing a lot of theses while roll searching.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
864 Posts |
I guess MD's get a lot of newbies people excited for a minute until they learn how to spot the difference, and what to look for. So by what you say Coppercoins, to kind of paraphrase so you see if I "get it yet" is that if you see the same kind of doubling reflected on both the date and the MM on the same pre 1990 coin, then it's got to be Machine Doubling. But from 1990 onward, you might well be looking at a real DD and you should look closely ... in my case, I'd also post an image of it in here for opinions  I guess I've been spotting a lot of MD's too. Sounds like loose parts shifting/slipping or slightly misaligned causing mini-jolting in the striking process? |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
864 Posts |
PS: yes, having a couple of DD's for reference would be helpful, I'm sure.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
Machine Doubling can vary from strike to strike. Here is an image to show you of an example I found in the same roll: 
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
864 Posts |
Thanks for the photos Coop ;)
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7629 Posts |
This effect is NOT Machine Doubling. It is die wear. There is a big difference between the two and a big difference in their appearance...even though neither add to the value of the coin. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
864 Posts |
Ok, thanks for that distinction Coppercoins ;)
|
| |
Replies: 11 / Views: 1,598 |
|
Posted 10/31/2010 11:39 am
