CONECA variety discription

BlueCole

I'll be looking at catalougs, and under varieties, i'll see stuff like "PR-5-R-II-C+VI. "

How can i break it down so it makes sense?

(BTW, "PR-5-R-II-C+VI. is from the PR 1937 wheatie thread)

Thank you,

b.

kranky

CONECA uses this system to classify the different doubled die coins.

PR=Proof coin
5 = doubled die number 5 (these are arbitrarily numbered as they are discovered)
R = doubled on the Reverse
II = Class II doubled die*
C = (not sure on this) I think this means it's spread toward the center (as opposed to spreading towards the edge)
+VI = also shows Class VI doubling

*Classes:
CLASS I - Rotated Hub Doubling
CLASS II - Distorted Hub Doubling
CLASS III - Design Hub Doubling
CLASS IV - Offset Hub Doubling
CLASS V - Pivoted Hub Doubling
CLASS VI - Distended Hub Doubling
CLASS VII - Modified Hub Doubling
CLASS VIII - Tilted Hub Doubling

The Cherrypickers' Guide by Fivaz and Stanton has a wonderful section on the different types of doubling and explains each type in great detail.

coppercoins

Here's how it's broken down (in CONECA language)...

The prefix "PR" means that it's a proof coin. It wouldn't have this if the coin were business strike.

The "5" means it's the fifth different die found for this side if the coin for this date and mint. In other words, the die explained is the fifth different reverse doubled die found on a 1937P cent.

The "R" denotes that it's on the reverse. If it were obverse, it would be an "O".

The last part gets complicated. This is where the classification of doubling is noted, and if there is more than one classification used to describe the die, they are put in numerical order. Classifications are always noted by CONECA using roman numerals, and there are eight different ones, I through VIII.

For this particular coin, the II-C+VI means that the coin has class 2 and class 6 doubling and the class 2 doubling is toward the center of the design. Class 2 and class 6 hub doubling are both explained in the original message in the thread you found this number in.

As the last part of the "lesson," there is one more thing to know about CONECA die numbers. If there is a number in parentheses after the classification, this means the die shows that many designs in the hubbings. In other words, a (3) would mean a tripled die, (4) would mean quadrupled die, etc.

1-O-I : This would be the first obverse die reported for that year and is class 1, rotated hub doubling. This is what the die number looks like for the 1955 DDO and the 1972 DDO.

2-R-V-CCW from K-7 : This would be the second reverse die known for the year, and is class 5, pivoted hub doubling, and the pivot point is at 7:00 around the rim (as facing a clock).

13-R-II-C+V-CW(3) from K-10 : The thirteenth reverse showing class 2 (distorted hub doubling) toward the center and class 5 hub doubling running clockwise from a 10:00 pivot point. The two classes are from separate hubbings, thus creating tripling.

Just a few hypothetical examples to help you out.

coppercoins

Sorry, Kranky, believe it or not, I had already started typing my response before yours showed up. I didn't mean to duplicate your effort.

kranky

You explained it better, I'm glad you posted it.

coppercoins

As a bit of further explanation (I forgot before), CONECA is moving away from using these die numbers for every day use. They are still assigned as such, but when simply describing 1937P 5-R-II-C+VI to someone, you would simply use 1937P DDR-005.

I have begun the lengthy process of photographing and publishing all of the different Lincoln cent die varieties (over 2,500 of them). The die numbers I am assigning to the dies are likely different in many cases from the CONECA die numbers, because they have never published information or photographs for over half of the existing dies. Without photographs, die identification to their system is rather impossible. The system I am working on is a fix for what they haven't done - publication tot he mainstream collector WITH photographs and full information.

My die numbers are rather simple to understand. The above mentioned die works out to be 1937P-1DR-001P. An explanation:

it's a 1937P.

The second part is the denomination with the type of anomaly. It's a cent, so it is "1". A nickel would be "5", and a $10 gold would be "1000". Basically, it's how many cents are in the face value of the coin. A Half cent would be "0".

The type of anomaly goes as such: DO for doubled obverse, DR for doubled reverse, MM for an RPM, OM for an OMM, RD for a repunched date, and OD for an overdate.

This is the first die listed for this year, and this mint. So it gets "001". The next die gets "002".

Since this is a proof, it gets the suffix of "P".

So, we have 1937P-1DR-001P

A die number 1864P-2RD-004 would be the fourth repunched date for 1864 two cent coins.
1888S-100MM-001 would be the first RPM reported for an 1888S Morgan dollar.

Pretty simple, and in my experience I have found that keeping things simple works best for everyone. Anyhow, just a primer as to what I am working on, and what I hope to eventually take over as the industry standard.

Steve27

kranky and coppercoins, this is excellent information! Can you tell me where/how the FS numbers are derived (e.g. FS-015 for a 1974-D DDO Kennedy)?

coppercoins

The FS numbers were assigned with each denomination in chronological order, starting with the first edition. When they wrote the second edition, they found it necessary to add more numbers in between existing numbers (bad palnning if you ask me) so they found the need to add decimal numbers to keep the whole system in chronological order.

So, in a specific case for example, FS# 1c-007 is a doubled die reverse 1865 indian cent. FS# 1c-008 is an RPD 1867 indian cent. Those were published in the first edition. By the second edition, they had found many other listings that needed to be added between those two, thus FS 1c-007.2, 007.4 and many other listings were added. My guess is that the hundredth place was added for the third edition, thus FS 1c-007.45, and so forth.

There are many drawbacks to this listing system other than what has been mentioned above. For one, a listing number doesn't even denote whether the anomaly is on the obverse or reverse of the coin, nor does it state the anomaly type. Referring to the catalog is a constant necessity unless you have a photographic memory and can somehow assimilate these numbers to each different die. It works much like the Breen system in that there is nothing in the die number that denotes what the die is. This was changed by John Wexler with his system (described previously) which was eventually sold to CONECA and is now known as the CONECA system.

As a footnote, the only other existing system which has yet to be described is the system John Wexler used to replace his sold system (to CONECA), which is currently used by NCADD. At first it involved the use of a two letter abbreviation for the series and the anomaly type, follwed by a die number. The famous 1955 DDO would read as 1955 LCDDO-001. The famous doubled monticello Jefferson nickel would be 1939 JNDDR-001. For reasons I am unaware of, he abandoned that system and went to a simpler system of using his last initial, the anomaly type, and the die number. Hence, 1955 1c WDDR-001 and 1939 5c WDDR-001 respectively. At the time he told me that he had abandoned the system using the series initials, the die numbers were simply transferred one for one to the new system using his initial, thus 1970S LCDDO-012 would directly correspond to 1970S 1c WDDO-012.

When I originally developed the idea of publishing complete die reference information on the web with photos (a complete online attribution guide) I approached both NCADD and CONECA to attempt an agreement that I would publish their reference systems and die numbers. This was in an effort to abstain from creating another system (as if we didn't already have enough) and completely reinventing the wheel for a fourth time. Unfortunately I found that neither source was willing to completely and openly work with having their systems published by a third party who was unable to pay them for the information for each die, so I had no choice but to create a completely new system and abandon attempts to help either of the sources. NCADD has yet to publish any clear information that allows attribution by anyone other than the club attributors, and CONECA has yet to publish clear information with images that would allow for self-attribution. My system is the only one that freely distributes this sort of information, and is the only one to ever publish multiple images of lesser known minor die varieties for self-attribution.

BlueCole

hmm, learn something new every day. I think ui'll rename the thread variety discriptions for easier search look up.

B.