Merc Dime Experts. What do you see here.

Fairlaneman

I took a picture of three S mint marks on three different Mercs from the 1920's. One of these looks different than the other two. Take a look and give me some comments on what you see. I was comparing the mint marks by how they are positioned to the leaf and then the distance from the rim. Maybe I am all wet but one of these looks bigger than the other two examples.



After a few comments, if you can see the picture clearly, I will be back and tell you what dates these three coins are. I do not have the coins at home so the three could not be compared in my hand. I will go get these next week and take a closer look.

Ken

goose3

the middle one certainly looks larger to me at least the lower portion of the S does on it.

fcloud

The mint used different punches for many years. The 1928-S is known to have large and small varieties. I wonder if more than one of those might be 1928?

I am not sure what year, but the mint standardized on size, so even though 1945 had variations, the Micro "s" is actually a stamp used for another government in which the US was producting coins.

Fairlaneman

Very true. The 28S did have two differemt size mint marks. Everything I have read about Mercs has said it is the Only date in the twenties that has a different size S. That middle S shown here is not a 28S. The third one is the small version of a 28S. Maybe the Camera is fooling me but I believe that Middle S is larger than the other two also. If it really is then another date in the Merc Series in the twenties has two different size Mint marks. I will take a look at the three dimes shown tomorrow to see if the picture is out of proportion.

Ken

fcloud

Ken,

Page 67 in the 2004 Red Book, gives an explanation of the changes in the MM.

"A more or less standard size small mint mark was used on all minor coins starting in 1909, and on all dimes, quarters and halves after the Barber series was replaced in 1916. Slight variations in mint mark size occur through 1945 with noticable differences in 1928, when small and large S mint marks were used."

I take this to mean that there is variation thoughout the series.

The 1945 micro s is also mentioned. It is a mint mark used from the Philippine coins of 1907-1920.

Tony

Fairlaneman

Tony

True the Mint marks changed. The 1916 was different than the 1917. The S that was on the 1917 ran from then untill 1941 with no variations except the Large 28S or so they say. After 1941 the S changed four times I believe. The middle S mint mark picture is from a dime in the 20's and it is not a 28S. So if this is true everything I have read about Mercs and thier S mint mark in the period of 1917 untill 1941 is not correct.

Ken

fcloud

Ken,

Then is it possible that it is punched deep, or die degradation? As the dies are used the metal actually gets larger which may give the appearance of a larger mint mark.

Can you pm me the year?

Tony

Fairlaneman

Tony I am going to get the three dimes tomorrow and see what is going on with them. I just noticed the difference when I was looking at the pictures I have taken of the coins. Number one picture is a 26S. Two is a 27S and the thrid is a 28S shown here.

If it is bigger on the 27S I will try to get a better picture of the Mint Mark.

Ken

fcloud

1927-S--the "S" I don't have (even in my circ set). I guess I can't go through and compare.

coolkarma

<< <i>Then is it possible that it is punched deep, >>



Since the S seems to be noticeably wider at the bottom than the top, I would go with either Tony's deep punch or a re-punch, with extra pressure on the lower part of the S. My very circulated 1927-s seems to have the same characteristic although not to the same extent. My circulated 26-s and 28-s do not - they look more like your 26-s and 28-s - except yours don't seem to be as nicely circulated as mine.

Android

Ken,

The guy to ask is across the street. David Lange knows more about things with mercs than just about anyone.

remumc

Hi fellow Mercateers!

While I am no expert, I note that on my mint state examples, that the "S" mintmark on the 1928-S is stamped much higher in relation to the lower leaf than my 27-S. Still, the "S" mintmark on my 27-S "looks" noticably larger than the one on my 28-S. Whether this is an optical illusion, a deeper punch, I don't know. I don't have a 26-S to compare with, so no comment there. I can furnish photos of mine to anyone who wants to make a study of this.

Regards,

Wayne

Fairlaneman

Good Evening.

Tony got this one correct a few posts back. After looking at all three dimes I noticed that the strike on the E of one is flattened out thus making the E look larger also. This flat effect has made the bottom of the S look larger than it is suppose to be. The top of the S is exactly the same as the other two shown.

Wayne does your 27S also have the weak flattened E in one ? If so this just looks like a weak strike at the rim and not a different S.

Ken

remumc

Hi Ken,

My 27-S has a great strike around the rim, and has 75% full bands in the center. There is absolutely no weakness in the "one", it is fully struck.

Regards,

Wayne

fcloud

Leave it to that die degradation!