Merc Dime Design change refresher course.

Fairlaneman

This was shown here about a year or so ago. With the many new collectors that have started posting here I thought it was time to show the three designs of the Merc Dime. Pretty suttle changes but if you know what to look for you can pick them out quickly.

The only date that shows two of the designs is 1917. You can have a Type of 1916 and aType of 1917 for the date. 1918 started out with its own design which was the last and final change. The only other change was a loss of detail that occured in 1926, but I have coins that show this in 1924, and continued through the end of the series in 1945.

Anyway what you want to look at is the Wing Feather detail in the upper 50% of the Wing. Take a look at the three examples and see if you can pick this detail change up. The first coin is a 1916S which shows the original Feather design. The second dime is a 1917S which shows the detail of the Type of 1917 detail. The thrid is a 1918D which shows the Type of 1918 detail which continued through the end of the series. Minor changes also occured with her hair but these were very minor and you would have to have a completely struck coin to pick these up.





Ken

wingedliberty

I feel refreshed. Hey, where is my J1794 Pattern Merc?

wingedliberty

Very well done Ken. I love the slight differences in Liberty's expression. Its noticable. Great thread.

wingedliberty

ttt

jom

Good job, Fairlaneguy!

The first time I think anyone heard this info about the Merc dime was in David Lange's book. The pics you showed give good examples of the changes. You ought to do some Photoshop and circle the areas changed so it's easier for people to see. Something that is lacking in many coin books I've noticed....

jom

Fairlaneman

Here is a close up of the section of the Wings. Also a picture is being shown that gives you the area of the missing design that was mentioned in the original post.

Mr Lange did a excellent job with his book about Mercury Dimes and it is required reading for any serious person that collects the series. Hopefully some day a new book will be printed that updates the scarcity of the various dates. Mr Lange did a fine job on this but through the years some dates have become more scarce than originally thought in my opinion.





Ken

wingedliberty

wingedliberty

Very well done Ken!

RiffRaff1967

I wish I could say that I see it - but I don't. Other than the 1917 seeming like a weak strike, I don't see the differences in what has been circled. The picture of the "area of the missing design" does not come up for me.


<< <i>I love the slight differences in Liberty's expression. Its noticable >>


To me, the 1916 seems to have a fuller, more three dimensional face - in comparison to the 1918, that seems more flat and has a "serious" look. Is this what you mean?

Please help this newbie - Thanks!

LAWMAN

cooool. More educational, informative posts, please! Especially about Mercs.

richbeat

Nice thread! Another "subtle" change occurred from 1926 to 1928, when the digit 9 in the date gradually changed from an open loop to a closed loop. Here are three links to pattern Mercury dimes. Note the expression on Miss Liberty's face in each one:


J1981/P2038 without initials


J1983/P2042 without initials


J1984/P2044 with initials


Some may argue that the third link (J1984) is not a true pattern, as it was approved and struck for circulation. However the rims proved to be too thick and the dimes got stuck in phone pay boxes. Most of those struck were recalled and melted. A few survived.

jdimmick

Great post Fairlaneman,

I actually was not aware of the differences and redesigns.

thanks

coinkat

great picture and excellent comments... I was not aware of those differences

fcloud

Ken,

Thanks for starting this imformative thread.

Here is an observation I have made early on in collecting Mercury Dimes.

I would contend that the type 1 (1916 and early 1917) have a higher relief than the type 2 coins. It is evident by the circulated coins. Note how few coins in 1916 fall in the middle grades (f-vf). You need to have the coins side by side for this comparision. I don't think I have ever seen mention of the high relief, but it is there if you look for it. Miss Liberty's head (upper left part of the feathers) protrudes farther off the field in the type 1. The face looks to be more rounded, too. I have not made the same determination for the reverse; the reverse changes, but nothing like the obverse.

There is also a finish issue. The type 1 has a matt finish. Not sure if it is on all early or type 1 coins, but my 1916, 1916-S and 1917 have a matt finish which does not seem to be found in the later dates.

Tony

RiffRaff1967

richbeat - I can definately see the difference in facial expressions on your pics. This is a great thread - I never knew there were different designs on the Mercury Dime - thanks!

jom

Actually, Fairlane's black pencil trace should go out to the wing tips at the top right corner. There you can definately see a difference, especially the 17 vs 18.

There are a lot of little quirks on the Merc dime and some rarities. I believe all the FB non-sense has led an unfortunate ignorance of a lot of good info about the rarity of the series. Such as a 16-S is more rare with the top and bottom diagonal "band" full than the middle band. Or the "0" in 1920-S (or was it the D mint?) is not often found full, mostly runs into the rim. These little nuiances are forgotten in this series because most seem to want to ignore everything except the center band. Too bad....

jom

Fairlaneman

Jom has made some good points also. The date running into the rim is a point that a person that collects these just takes for granted and looks for right off the bat. 1920 is a good example and the 1921's is another example of the date going into the rim on many of the coins seen. Here are a couple of pictures showing exactly how close the date is in relation to the rim on 1920's and 1921's. Also look at the 9 in the date. The shape changed later in the series, which someone mentioned here, and looking at the 9 is a excellent first diagonostic point for the determination of whether a 1916D or the 1921 coins are real or fake.




Ken

Fairlaneman

Strike is a big problem with some of the dates. Take a look at these two coins. Most I believe would not even think they are Mint State examples. Some time back I put the 25D up in a thread here and most called it AU at best. These two dates are among the hardest to find well struck.

Darn I hope you folks are not having as many problems seeing the images as I amm having.




Ken

grip

Nothing wrong with the images,but I noticed something that wasen't brought up,on the 16 the date is on the neck line,where the others are further down?.May be just the scan.Al

JRocco

Great job Ken. Your contribution to these boards is appreciated. Its posts like this, and contributors like yourself, that make this place awesome. Thank you.

richbeat

Mucho thanks from me as well.

Fairlaneman

JRocco....this is just for you. The coin you use as a Icon... Thank You for the compliment. I am just thrilled to be a part of this excellent place for Numismatic information.




Ken