1909S-VDB PHONY! (link included)
MarkW63
Posts: 1,532 ✭✭✭✭
Well, this has mint mark position issues & font style as well as reverse issues, Deep valley "N" in UNITED the designer's initials are wrong the period following the "V" is to low of the right leg of the "V" (to close to the rim)
Look at how closed the loop is in the first 9 in the date.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/284814121309?hash=item42503e995d:g:uxIAAOSwm99iedYA
"I Prefer Dangerous Freedom Over Peaceful Slavery"
Thomas Jefferson!
0
Comments
The more I look at this trash job of a counterfeit the worse it gets.
The Wheat ears are terrible
"I Prefer Dangerous Freedom Over Peaceful Slavery"
Thomas Jefferson!
That's a fugly one!
Hey, while were on the subject (VDB) what year was the final year of the VDB INT's.
Was it 1919 on the Lincoln cents ?
Yes, I'm leading up to something.
From what I can gather the designer's initials were removed after 1909 and then reintroduce and relocated to the obverse in 1918.
I do believe their is known to exist some 1910 VDB's but they would be an error coin.
"I Prefer Dangerous Freedom Over Peaceful Slavery"
Thomas Jefferson!
Thanks MarkW63.
I'm working on this 1936 S. Lincoln Cent. Just playing around.
Relocated ? Obverse ? What first sent me down this path was a flicker of a strike on the reverse in the normal location.
We'll get back to that later.
The obverse tells another story as you stated and gave me a what if moment . Check these photo's out.
.
.
@MarkW63 I can't wait to read your reply to emerald's corroded 1936 S VDB.
Another one GONE!
Great! a big thank you to the group!
"I Prefer Dangerous Freedom Over Peaceful Slavery"
Thomas Jefferson!
Yep, it's gone now the only unfinished business is for you to tell emerald about his 1936 S VDB.
@emeraldATV
Its appears to me by looking at your micro zoomed images that your thinking it possible you have a 1936-S Lincoln Cent that during the minting process the designer's initials are incorrectly located, instead of being next the shoulder in the normal location they're located way closer to the date. Is that correct?
You didn't add any line marks to exact points, so my eye's are scanning to wide of an area.
They're people here who know more of the possibilities of mint strike error's than me for sure, and I don't really search out error coins, other than say a 55 DDO, maybe an RPM.
But, when the presses & dies are producing coins even in 1936 its my understanding that it was a high speed process.
That means that a single die set producing coins and in the area were the designers initials is being struck something had to change position to cause a location error for one coin, then jump back to correct position for the rest of the coins.
This isn't like some silver plancets got into the mix somewhere, there is no other known strike error's of this type for the 1936-S Lincoln cent, I don't see how it would be possible for there to not be hundred's or thousand's of them with the designer's initials all over the place. I believe the correct term I'm looking for is, this type of error would be of enough numbers to make it a "Variety" of an unknown number. the coins are hand inspected but not EVERY COIN, thousands go by and the inspector randomly pulls a few out and inspects them while thousands more go on by. When an error is found its my understanding that the presses are would be shut down for those dies producing the error and correction made, and then returned to production, so for a line inspector to have caught the second error strike and STOP that line process and only other make it into circulation is probably as likely as the same person getting struck by lightening 5 times in one day and living to tell about it.
What I do run across pretty often when I'm searching for these phony coin listing's is people finding things mixed in the surface imperfections of the coins when using high magnification, Is to find 1909-P VDB's with SUPER ZOOMED images of what the seller believes to be traces of an "S" mint mark, but with near perfect details in the date.
To them the S can be any font style, turned at any angle, and any position beneath the date. But they do see an "S" but its not a STRUCK "S" mint mark.
"I Prefer Dangerous Freedom Over Peaceful Slavery"
Thomas Jefferson!
A little history:
Charles Barber didn't like Brenner. The dislike was well known in Mint circles. After the removal of Brenners initials from the reverse of the Cent, A problem that was lurking in the background came forward.
Barber used a "B" for his designer initial on the coins he is credited with making. There was no way that Brenner could use the single letter, and the V.D.B. was also out.
So what was done? Nothing. No initial was ever put back on the Cent. This suited Brenner well, and during the remainder of his tenure till his death in 1918, nobody dared to bring it up.
It was George Morgan who restored the V.D.B. inconspicuously to the bottom of Lincolns shoulder in 1918, where they have remained ever since.
Pete
@ MarkW63
"Its appears to me by looking at your micro zoomed images that your thinking it possible you have a 1936-S Lincoln Cent that during the minting process the designer's initials are incorrectly located, instead of being next the shoulder in the normal location they're located way closer to the date. Is that correct"?
Ok, it did enter my mind but the theory had to be explored (for about 3 clicks of the shutter) and disregarded.
What was I thinking ?
My monitor is 36 inches, HD
"Wheat Reverse cents were produced at the Philadelphia, Denver, and San Francisco mints. In general, cents from Philadelphia are well made; those from Denver and San Francisco are often poorly struck from worn dies. Key dates in the series include the afore mentoned 1909-S VDB, 1914-D, and 1922 "Plain", plus the 1909-S and 1931-S. Interesting varieties include the 1917 and 1936 Doubled Die Obverse."
The what if factor.
What date was the final issue of the V.D.B. on the reverse of a Lincoln cent ?