1922-d lincoln cent raw no d

LanceNewmanOCC

not my coin.

i don't consider myself a pro at authenticating 22-d no d cents, SO, do you think this looks apropos?

coinbuf

No

asheland

Definitely looks suspicious to me.

Jeffnlu

@coinbuf said:
No

@asheland said:
Definitely looks suspicious to me.

Mind saying what looks off?

asheland

It’s not exactly my area, but the space where the mint mark is missing looks a little funny, and the 22 doesn’t look quite right.

asheland

The second 2 is usually stronger:
From coinfacts:
plus strong reverse

WaterSport

Looks Ok to me considering its a tad rough.

WS

MarkKelley

This is not die pair #2, and that's the one that brings the big money.

coinbuf

@Jeffnlu said:

@coinbuf said:
No

@asheland said:
Definitely looks suspicious to me.

Mind saying what looks off?

Sorry I should have been more clear, to clarify, I assumed the op was asking if this is die pair 2, which is the only no D coin that has a substantial value. It does look like it could be die pair #3. But most collectors are looking for die pair #2, This page at the Lincoln Cent Resource has nice photos of each die pair. lincolncentresource.com/1922Ddievarieties.html

LanceNewmanOCC

@coinbuf said:

@Jeffnlu said:

@coinbuf said:
No

@asheland said:
Definitely looks suspicious to me.

Mind saying what looks off?

Sorry I should have been more clear, to clarify, I assumed the op was asking if this is die pair 2, which is the only no D coin that has a substantial value. It does look like it could be die pair #3. But most collectors are looking for die pair #2, This page at the Lincoln Cent Resource has nice photos of each die pair. lincolncentresource.com/1922Ddievarieties.html

despite me having read that page probably 20-30 times over the years, i just now kinda noticed something that MAY be off.

die pair 2 is reported to be the plain no D strong reverse. the big one. (edited for error)

BUT when i read one of the bullet points for die 3, the first line reads:

"Second 2 in date is weaker than first 2."

isn't the opposite to be true?

https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1922-no-d-1c-strong-reverse-bn/3285

also alanski's coin that just came back is also first 2 weak. fwiw

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1085819/currently-at-fun-getting-graded-guess-their-grade-grade-posted/p2

CaptHenway

Removed mint mark.

OAKSTAR

@CaptHenway said:
Removed mint mark.

johnny9434

To funky looking, pass

lkeigwin

If authentic, this is what used to be called the 22 no-D weak reverse.

PCGS no longer recognizes the no-D weak reverse. It is simply a 22-D. Only the strong reverse is a no-D.

So it doesn't matter whether the D is there or not, with the weak reverse.

If the question is has it been altered I'd say probably, but who cares? Unless you're hoping to buy a $30 coin and have it straight grade for $50.
Lance.

dcarr

I think it is a genuine weak D, with weak reverse (which is not the version that sells for a big premium).

davewesen

Pretty sure you have a die 3 and PCGS will no longer call that a No D. It will get the weak D

PCGS article on it -> https://pcgs.com/news/do-you-really-have-1922-weak-d-cent

coinbuf

@LanceNewmanOCC said:

@coinbuf said:

@Jeffnlu said:

@coinbuf said:
No

@asheland said:
Definitely looks suspicious to me.

Mind saying what looks off?

Sorry I should have been more clear, to clarify, I assumed the op was asking if this is die pair 2, which is the only no D coin that has a substantial value. It does look like it could be die pair #3. But most collectors are looking for die pair #2, This page at the Lincoln Cent Resource has nice photos of each die pair. lincolncentresource.com/1922Ddievarieties.html

despite me having read that page probably 20-30 times over the years, i just now kinda noticed something that MAY be off.

die pair 3 is reported to be the plain no D strong reverse. the big one.

BUT when i read one of the bullet points for die 3, the first line reads:

"Second 2 in date is weaker than first 2."

isn't the opposite to be true?

https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1922-no-d-1c-strong-reverse-bn/3285

also alanski's coin that just came back is also first 2 weak. fwiw

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1085819/currently-at-fun-getting-graded-guess-their-grade-grade-posted/p2

I was always taught and have always known die pair #2 as the strong reverse, the big one not die pair #3. What reference have you seen that claims die pair #3 as the strong reverse.

If you look at the photos for both die pair 1 and 3 the second 2 is weaker than the first 2, that is one way to identify a weak D or weak reverse from the real deal. The real strong reverse will have the second 2 more strongly struck than the first.

LanceNewmanOCC

@coinbuf said:
I was always taught and have always known die pair #2 as the strong reverse, the big one not die pair #3. What reference have you seen that claims die pair #3 as the strong reverse.

If you look at the photos for both die pair 1 and 3 the second 2 is weaker than the first 2, that is one way to identify a weak D or weak reverse from the real deal. The real strong reverse will have the second 2 more strongly struck than the first.

i see. the list has it at number 3 slot but is die pair 2. thanks for pointing that out. i thought it sounded weird to me at the time. now i know why.

stockdude_

I think i see the remnants of a D

blaircountycoin

I vote yes. The second 2 is more defined than the first one, and Liberty gets thicker left to right. But the reverse is weak.