Partial date, off center Lincoln...possible wide AM? (pics)

Smitty79 · December 14, 2006 5:36AM

I was looking over a 200x off center cent I bought some time back and noticed what appears to be a gap between the A and what would have been the the begining of the M in America. You think this is enough evidence to conclude that this is a 2000 wide AM cent? The FG is gone so I can't diagnose it based on that. I compared it with a '98 wide AM and seems legit. What says you?

Here's my 1998 wide AM close up for comparison.

Edited to add: Before anyone asks, no it's not slabbed, it's in a Whitman plastic 2x2.

Jcarney · December 14, 2006 5:49AM

I really can't tell from that pic.

mgoodm3 · December 14, 2006 5:55AM

Is that one of them partial date, partial off-center, partial close AM lincolns?

Smitty79 · December 14, 2006 5:57AM

Added a little bit clearer pic.

Smitty79 · December 14, 2006 5:58AM

<< Is that one of them partial date, partial off-center, partial close AM lincolns? >>

So you think it's just a close AM? Oh well.

mgoodm3 · December 14, 2006 6:06AM

Since I really couldn't remember which one was the cool one, maybe it's a:

Is that one of them partial date, partial off-center, partial wide AM lincolns?

66RB · December 14, 2006 6:08AM

Smitty..I may be wrong here, but I think when you have an off-center strike, some design elements near the edge tend to become distorted. That could make the A and M appear to not be touching.

joecheck · December 14, 2006 6:16AM

It's definitly a 2000 TYPE II (wide AM), off-center. Send it off to ANACS for recognition.

Congratulations!

Jcarney · December 14, 2006 6:50AM

<< It's definitly a 2000 TYPE II (wide AM), off-center. Send it off to ANACS for recognition.

Congratulations!

>>

Joe, are you looking at the bottom pic to make that call? Because that IS a wide AM cent. The off-center cent is shown in the top three photos. I've looked through a lot of1998-2000 Lincolns for wide AMs and have found 6 or 7, but can't make any determination from these pics. I'm wondering what you're seeing that I'm not.

seanq · December 14, 2006 6:52AM

<< Smitty..I may be wrong here, but I think when you have an off-center strike, some design elements near the edge tend to become distorted. That could make the A and M appear to not be touching. >>

I don't think enough of the M struck up to make a determination one way or the ohter.

Sean Reynolds

coppercoins · December 15, 2006 2:24AM

There are a number of other design elements that one can note in the difference between the two reverses. The initials, the shape and size of the S of STATES, and the overall depth of the steps on the memorial. The AM is not the only place to look.

Get a nice photo of the initials and I can tell for certain which it is.

66RB · December 15, 2006 2:30AM

coppercoins, he said in his first post that the initials 'FG' were not there.

been waiting for you to chime in here, any other way to tell based on the photos?

Smitty79 · December 15, 2006 6:17AM

Thanks for the tip. Yea, the dies just missed striking the FG. I'll get a couple good pics of states in a little bit.

JRocco · December 15, 2006 8:01AM

<< 

<< Smitty..I may be wrong here, but I think when you have an off-center strike, some design elements near the edge tend to become distorted. That could make the A and M appear to not be touching. >>

I don't think enough of the M struck up to make a determination one way or the ohter.

Sean Reynolds >>

Gotta chime in with my agreement here too

Smitty79 · December 15, 2006 8:13AM

I suppose we'll find out soon enough. Here's a pic of 'states'.

kwmorgan · December 15, 2006 8:21AM

I see exposed zinc.

Hopefully its in an airtight container.

coppercoins · December 15, 2006 6:32PM

I see what appears to be evidence of a type 2, wide AM cent there. The evidence is nearly unmistakable in the photo of the word STATES, which is why I asked for that shot. What many don't know about the difference in that area is that the A of STATES is closer to the second T on the newer (close AM) type and is equidistant to the two Ts in the older (wide AM) style. There are also minute differences in the shape of the S letters. The most profound difference (without the AM or initials) can be found in the steps. The relief of the steps in the wide AM reverse is higher than in the newer close AM reverse.

I would have to see the coin up-close for detailed examination, but from appearances you have the scarcer reverse type.

To prove my point I took four cents out of pocket change and photographed them, only making sure two were pre-1993 and the other two were post-1992. That's when the wide to close AM change took place. Take a look at the images and compare to the image posted above of the coin in question...

Smitty79 · December 16, 2006 1:39AM

Awesome, thanks for the info CC.

Jcarney · December 16, 2006 2:05AM

<< I see what appears to be evidence of a type 2, wide AM cent there. >>

You're right. I didn't know about this diagnostic and really appreciate learning something new today. I just checked all my wide AM cents, a few Type 1 cents and a few proof cents from those years. The A and T spacing and alignment is the same on the Type 2 business srike cent as the proofs and, it appears, the OP's off-center cent. Very cool find Smitty and thanks coppercoins for the education!

JRocco · December 16, 2006 3:06AM

One thing I can add is you can always take what C.D. says to the bank

Smitty79 · December 16, 2006 3:33AM

Here's some full shots of my Lincoln.

Partial date, off center Lincoln...possible wide AM? (pics)

Comments

Leave a Comment