1970-S Lincoln Proof... DDO??
Graphicview
Posts: 37
Hi All, I have a couple of these with identical markings on the date. I'm not sure if this is mechanical, overdate, or DDO... Any ideas?
0
Comments
However, there is nothing more frustrating in this world than having an authentic doubled die masked under machine doubling!
Closeups on LIBERTY and the Motto would be helpful but from this single photograph, my vote is for mechanical doubling.
The name is LEE!
to have some roundness going on. we'll stay tuned!
notched.
Check this one out:
When looking at proofs, it's always helpful to remember that they get struck at least twice if not three times. The net result is that proofs can end up with some weird looking machine doubling.
For the OP's coin, the S in TRUST gives it away as well as a lack of anything in LIBERTY.
For my coin, a 1967 SMS Kennedy that's just whacked out.
The name is LEE!
Of course that's JMHO, and you probably only need to look at relative post counts (or my signature), to know which opinion should carry more weight.
<< <i>Strange.It almost looks like a combination of both. >>
...indeed.
Proof are struck multiple times.
Neat but not worth any extra.
<< <i>Of course that's JMHO, and you probably only need to look at relative post counts (or my signature), to know which opinion should carry more weight.
Post counts have little to do with observations and opinions. The more eyes the better and the more opinions which can be assessed, the better. It's what makes the hobby interesting and your opinions and observations carry just as much weight as anybody elses. Thanks!
BTW, if Q. David Bowers started posting today, his post count would be 1.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>Thanks everyone for the thoughtful responses. The "0" in the date seems to be the wildcard ... but this raises the question of how "repeatable" can mechanical doubling be? I have 3-4 examples of this pattern that came from the same roll. Would similiar mechanical doubling repeat itself in the minting process until, say, adjustments in the insert-strike-eject cycle are made? >>
Very repeatable as each of your coins more than likely came from the same die set in the same press which had some type of adjustment problem.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>Looks like self doubling >>
As in a cell multiplying to form additional cells?
A point that has gone un-noted so far in this post. This does not appear to actually be a proof coin...just a business strike 1970-S Large Date; at least if it is a proof coin, it's pretty well circulated. Does that fact that it's a single strike business strike make it a more candidate for being a DDO?
19Lyds - I appreciate the point about post count itself being a poor indicator of knowledge; with yourself IMHO being excepted from that generalization.
I see why the 0 looks convincing as a DDO but I think it's caused by the same strike doubling that shows on the S.
It's a teaser because it looks so convincing
<< <i>You're right... Mint State NOT Proof lincoln... >>
Looks proof to me and why'd your title state: "1970-S Lincoln Proof... DDO??"
The name is LEE!
If it was a doubled die, the 0 would be much thicker on the top and bottom. Picture the first impression made with the 0, then shift down half the thickness or so when making the second impression, and you would have a very thick top and bottom resulting on the 0. The thickness would be a characteristic of a true doubled die.
However, on this coin... there is no additional thickness. The thickness of the date (and all the rest of the lettering as far as I can see) are uniform and appear to be to be a normal thickness. Look at the bottom of the 0; note how narrow the width of each segment of the metal is... which indicates to me that the lines which at first appear to be a doubled die rather are impressed on the top of the digits, like mechanical doubling would do.
Though I do not think it is a doubled die, there is another possibility that I have seen on a few proof coins. Since proof coins are struck at least twice, if the coin shifts before the second strike, this could result in lines similar to what is on the coin. However, in that case, there should be some trace of the previous strike that would show in the field.... if would be flattened, but would be visible. Depending on how wide the shift and how visible it is, there could be some value.
In fact, I think strike doubling can produce some really nice pieces.
That said - I think this coin shows an example of strike doubling along
with all it's interesting little quirks.
I do not see a DDO here.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>Puh-roofy! Or not. >>
Agreed.
Successful Trades: Swampboy,