1955 Doubled die, late die state
EagleEye
Posts: 7,677 ✭✭✭✭✭
This well-known variety seems to have aquired a die clash late in its life. The dies were filed down to removed the marks. I suppose it is necesary to remove the die from the press to do this. Anyway, I think they would have noticed the wide doubling and trashed the dies. They didn't! Here is the discovery example of this latest die state of the 1955 DDO.
The coin is graded MS64RB by PCGS with "Late Die State" on the holder.
Here is the diagnostic die lines by the T in CENT:
The coin is graded MS64RB by PCGS with "Late Die State" on the holder.
Here is the diagnostic die lines by the T in CENT:
Rick Snow, Eagle Eye Rare Coins, Inc.Check out my new web site:
0
Comments
WS
on the 80's era Zincoln cents.
I have never seen nor even heard of a late die state 55 DDO with polish lines like this....
another more common 80's era phenomena.
Interesting.
<< <i>
Here is the diagnostic die lines by the T in CENT:
Thinking about this, it is a real wonder how the coin shows such heavy reverse
polishing, yet they didn't manage to polish away this little old diagnostic gouge/scratch
Really interesting coin that looks to be 100% the real deal to me.....but in an unexpected die state.
We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
<< <i>That is really cool! Nice photos too! >>
That said, the style of the LDS die polish strikes me as the kind that press operators caused when they cleaned the face(s) of the die(s) with an emery stick while the die(s) were still in the press. If they bothered to take the die(s) out of the press, they had other, better tools to work with.
TD
<< <i>The die lines are only on the right side of the obverse and the left side of the reverse. Luckily, they didn't do the entire die. The diagnostic is untouched. >>
I can see that now that you mention it.
I wonder how many more are out there?
<< <i>What was the average die life of a cent die in the 50's. How many coins were typically struck before a die was retired. In order for the die to get to the state shown on this coin, you would think a hundred thousand coins would've been struck by this die. Where are they? >>
These are good questions. Die life is a little bit of a guess because the Mints kept record of dies made, not used. But hundreds of thousands of strikes were very common.
Back in 1920 the average die struck almost half a million cents. That was more than twice the lifespan of the 1909 dies. In later years the die faces were plated with chromium and they lasted much longer.
Still, these are averages. I remember QDB saying that sometimes Lincoln dies failed quickly, after just a few thousand strikes.
Something like 40,000 1955 DDO's were struck, about 16,000 of which had not been mixed in with non-DDO cents and were destroyed. The rest were released.
Lance.
<< <i>That's a neat coin. I like the die polish lines. >>
I totally agree. Something about it.............
Franklin-Lover's Forum
<< <i>The die lines are only on the right side of the obverse and the left side of the reverse. Luckily, they didn't do the entire die. The diagnostic is untouched. >>
Would this be suggestive that the clash they were addressing was a strong one, i.e., it was visibly imparted to both sides?
EDIT: A lot of the time the only evidence of the dies having come together without a planchet in between is on one side, only. As these obverse and reverse areas you mention "line up" for a die clash, that's why I'm asking.
<< <i>
Maybe you guys are going too fast for me. I could see the late die state. My question related to your theory that they were polishing out a clash. Since it's evident they polished both dies, one would think the clash manifested on both sides of the coin.
Anyway, it is strange they didn't catch the error when they worked the dies. Or, maybe they did.
Report it to CONECA (Wiles) and see if it is a stage B, C, or even later (is it possible it is a LDS even with the "Die scratch South from inner Left crossbar of T of CENT" as JR's pic shows - is that your coin?):
1955 DDO-001, Designation: 1-O-I-CCW; FS-01-1955-101 (021.8)
Description: Very strong spread on LIBERTY, IN GOD WE TRUST, date, eye, bowtie, and vest
Stage A: Obverse is EDS
Die scratch South from inner Left crossbar of T of CENT – EDS
Stage B: MDS (unconfirmed)
Stage C: LDS (unconfirmed)
Reported by: Unknown
Does a variety remain a variety if it's proven to have been intentionally made?
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
<< <i>Does a variety remain a variety if it's proven to have been intentionally made? >>
Yeah, how could they have missed this one? If they knew what they were doing, i.e., putting an error back into circulation, that does kind of diminish the error. Is this late die state rather evidence that we caught them at their game? I mean, really, which is more plausible, that they were blind?
Remember that the Mint did notice this error while the die was still in use. They stopped the press and scrapped the die, but did not bother to condemn the 800,000 or so normal coins from other dies that the error coins had already been mixed in with. Whoever was in charge at the mint did not think it was that big a deal. The coins were within specs and legal to issue, so they issued them.
It was after the hoopla over this coin, and the publicity it generated that the Mint considered to be bad publicity, that the Mint started becoming self-conscious about error coins. Before the hoopla, they thought it was no big deal.
TD
<< <i>Just remember that 10% of the average work week is a Monday morning. Stuff happens.
Remember that the Mint did notice this error while the die was still in use. They stopped the press and scrapped the die, but did not bother to condemn the 800,000 or so normal coins from other dies that the error coins had already been mixed in with. Whoever was in charge at the mint did not think it was that big a deal. The coins were within specs and legal to issue, so they issued them.
It was after the hoopla over this coin, and the publicity it generated that the Mint considered to be bad publicity, that the Mint started becoming self-conscious about error coins. Before the hoopla, they thought it was no big deal.
TD >>
You suggested earlier that they polished these dies while they were still in the press. I wonder whether they could even have seen the doubling very well like that on the "negative" dies. I've never seen an actual "negative" die that was doubled, but I imagine same probably wouldn't be as apparent as on the "positive" coin.
Anyway, well done. I change my vote to acquittal.