Options
Is this a "Real" 1922 Plain
Smittys
Posts: 9,877 ✭✭✭✭✭
Smittys
Posts: 9,877 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
Hard to say from here, but if I had to take a guess I'd say "yes".
Jack
While the coin is worn, the reverse has the appearance of the weak variety.
Joe.
Collector since 1976. On the CU forums here since 2001.
Ira
If you look real close at the "L" of Pluribus and the "0" of ONE, you'll see a die crack that connects the two.
That's the diagnostic for the weak reverse version.
"NO D" or "WEAK D" coins were made from these dies, as the mintmark faded in and out continuously.
Hope this helps.
Pete
<< <i>If indeed there is no trace of the mintmark.........this coin is either a Die#1 or Die #3.
If you look real close at the "L" of Liberty and the "0" of ONE, you'll see a die crack that connects the two.
That's the diagnostic for the weak reverse version.
"NO D" or "WEAK D" coins were made from these dies, as the mintmark faded in and out continuously.
Hope this helps.
Pete >>
I believe I DO see the die crack near the L in PLURIBUS thru the O of ONE, but it needs to be a jogging or offset
die crack to be Die Pair 1 no D. But frankly, even on most called No D from that die pair, I can still see a trace of
the mintmark. In Die pair 3, which can be called weak D or No D, the reverse is MUCH weaker than Die Pair 1
and the O of ONE is smeared on it's left side and bottom into the field. I can still see a nbit of the MM unless
its a VG or less. Then, teh wear obscures the trace of the mintmark, usually.
Ira