The Great Imposter

19Lyds

For the Eisenhower Dollar, one of the popular FS coins to collect is the FS-106 1971-S Proof Coin. It's value ranges widely depending upon grade and cameo designation.

There is, however, a 1971-S DDO which "looks" like the FS-106 but in fact is NOT an FS-106. For the Record, the FS-106 is the DDO-022 as illustrated in the Authoritative Reference on Eisenhower Dollars and DDO-6 as illustrated in James Wiles book, CONECA Attribution Guide to Eisenhower Dollar Die Varieties.

DDO-029 (from the Authoritative Reference on Eisenhower Dollaers (ARED)
This particular Doubled Die is OFTEN confused (by the TPGs) with DDO-022 (1971-S Proof FS-106) which is ignorantly oblivious of the fact that DDO-022 is an ODV-006 Obverse Design (PegLeg R) and this one, possibly DDO-029 (but I doubt it due to that HUGE serif Split on the R), is an ODV-004 Obverse Design (Serifed R).

None the less, the separation on this particular die variety is quite impressive! Some (i.e. Brian Allen and previously Tom K) point to uplink Master Die similarities which I suppose is possible BUT it does not address the doubling which would have occurred on a "Working Die" during the working die creation process. The "serif" on the ODV-004 looks like it was added with a dremel type grinder tool to THE Master Die for 1971.

Of course, this doesn't address the fact that the doubling is "similar" but "not the same" meaning, the ODV-004 version has "rounding" in the "I" whereas the ODV-006 is quite square.

ODV-004 (DDO-029) on the left and ODV-006 (DDO-022) on the Right

Certainly "similar" but definitely not the same.

I can't think of any particular die wear that would change the "I" or the spread so dramatically.

As such, each die, being "different" cannot possibly be a "single" die variety. (i.e. FS-106) Dofferent dies, different FS numbers yet PCGS and NGC continually get it wrong costing some buyers, quite a chunk of change!

At any rate,

A bad buy:
ebay.com/itm/1971-S-DDO-FS-106-Silver-Eisenhower-FS-106-PCGS-PR-69-DC-Price-Guide-2-500-/391825776569?_trksid=p2047675.l2557&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&nma=true&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&si=%252FN034X%252B1tUs%252BRY8C543w7HScS2A%253D&rmvSB=true

Simply because the coin is NOT an FS-106 as indicated by the Serfied R!

KNOW your varieties before shelling out big bux!

NOTE: This is no slight on PCGS or even NGC, but the fact of the matter is that they have been misattributing the FS-106, and the FS-103 and they really need to start paying attention. If for no other reason than the integrity of the Eisenhower Dollar Varieties. It's hard enough to generate interest in this series without the varieties getting all muddied up by the professionals.

I have emailed them but have not gotten a response. I emailed the seller and he fell back on PCGS's attribution. Not that its the right thing to do as the buyers may or may not find out, but the coins are definitely not FS-106's.

ECHOES

Thanks Lee!

ricko

Good information... Thank you for the detailed explanation. Cheers, RickO

19Lyds

I received an email from Bill Fivaz indicating that some changes will be made in the next CPG to avoid misattributions.

wondercoin

DDO-022 vs. DDO-029.

I think the OP is showing that our board member, Datentype, who sold what PCGS designated as an FS-106 was not actually selling the DDO-022 (FS-022), but really a DDO-029. The doubling on the two different coins is essentially equally as strong but one die has a "Peg Leg R" and one does not. The one without the Peg Leg R can not therefore be an FS-106 so the thesis goes.

Similar to the OP's experience, I, too, have seen that the grading services will designate as FS-106 coins with both the Peg Leg R and coins without. And, so arguably the grading services are improperly calling "FS-106" both of these strong doubled die coins. I can understand how the OP would like to see this stop and an easy solution would be for the CPG to equally recognize BOTH very strong Doubled Die coins in the next edition of the CPG (not just one of them).

My son, Justin, has been through thousands upon thousands of (if not upwards of 10,000+) proof 1971-S Ike Dollars and has found a number of lovely DDO-022 and DDO-029 coins over the years. He has shown to me both Doubled Die examples and they are equally impressive. It really makes no sense to me that the CPG officially recognizes one of them and not the other. Since both coins are so strongly doubled, the grading services have been comfortable placing both under the FS-106 designation. Again, the CPG could resolve this matter in a New York second by simply adding both of these equally impressive doubled dies to their Guide.

To the OP's comment that Datentype's customer got a "bad buy" in paying just under $900 for the doubled die presented by Datentype on eBay. If Datentype's coin was the DDO-029 and if the CPG includes that doubled die as a separate entry in the next Guide, then I am not so sure the customer got a "bad buy" as FS-106 coins in that grade often sell for nearly 50%-100% in excess of that price in that grade. And, I think most everyone is in agreement that the doubling on the 022 and 029 are very "similar" and almost equally as strong as each other. And, Justin tells me he finds 022 and 029 doubled die coins nearly in the same quantities and quality so the coins could possibly end up being equally as scarce.

I am personally glad that the OP brought this thread to everyone's attention and I hope it results in the CPG recognizing BOTH scarce doubled die coins as separate entries in the upcoming next edition. This will likely result in some FS-106 coins being changed by the grading services to what would then likely be CPG FS-104. The pops would adjust and it just might happen that both the FS-106 and FS-104 coins take on a value very close to one another. Or, it would not be impossible that either coin would then become worth substantially more than the other depending upon exactly how many coins show in the grading companies' pops for each variety.

As always, just my two cents.

Wondercoin

Datentype

As always Mitch you are the true “Henry Kissinger“ of the coin world and a true heavyweight! As always, I am not. I look back at the time we spent in the PCGS lobby looking at coins, cracking and re-submitting etc. as some of the better times I have had as a coin dealer - things were really hopping in those days.

Lee you are a man of passion for your IKE expertise and I do appreciate your opinion. I do not troll the boards too often these days, as I like to spend my time searching vast quantities of coins instead. The 1971-s proof silver ike’s are really my first effort searching for those varieties. I looked on NGC’s variety page, PCGS blowups and the IKE group’s page and all of the coins I had sent in seemed to match the diagnostics perfectly and PCGS apparently thought so as well. No mention anywhere of the so-called peg leg.

My position is that PCGS grades and authenticates the coins and I take the good with the bad frequently. I believe they also guarantee their coins to be what they say they are so I go with that. According to you guys my coins are slabbed incorrectly. If PCGS thinks so they would give me a call. I have found stuff in the past at NGC and within the hour Rick M. would take care of business. Until then I will continue to sell my coins as they are labeled. The doubling is just as good or better and it is beyond me why they choose some and not the others as Mitch has pointed out. There is really not a huge amount of difference as far as I can tell and it does not lessen the coin in my opinion

19Lyds

@wondercoin said:
DDO-022 vs. DDO-029.

I think the OP is showing that our board member, Datentype, who sold what PCGS designated as an FS-106 was not actually selling the DDO-022 (FS-022), but really a DDO-029. The doubling on the two different coins is essentially equally as strong but one die has a "Peg Leg R" and one does not. The one without the Peg Leg R can not therefore be an FS-106 so the thesis goes.

Similar to the OP's experience, I, too, have seen that the grading services will designate as FS-106 coins with both the Peg Leg R and coins without. And, so arguably the grading services are improperly calling "FS-106" both of these strong doubled die coins. I can understand how the OP would like to see this stop and an easy solution would be for the CPG to equally recognize BOTH very strong Doubled Die coins in the next edition of the CPG (not just one of them).

My son, Justin, has been through thousands upon thousands of (if not upwards of 10,000+) proof 1971-S Ike Dollars and has found a number of lovely DDO-022 and DDO-029 coins over the years. He has shown to me both Doubled Die examples and they are equally impressive. It really makes no sense to me that the CPG officially recognizes one of them and not the other. Since both coins are so strongly doubled, the grading services have been comfortable placing both under the FS-106 designation. Again, the CPG could resolve this matter in a New York second by simply adding both of these equally impressive doubled dies to their Guide.

To the OP's comment that Datentype's customer got a "bad buy" in paying just under $900 for the doubled die presented by Datentype on eBay. If Datentype's coin was the DDO-029 and if the CPG includes that doubled die as a separate entry in the next Guide, then I am not so sure the customer got a "bad buy" as FS-106 coins in that grade often sell for nearly 50%-100% in excess of that price in that grade. And, I think most everyone is in agreement that the doubling on the 022 and 029 are very "similar" and almost equally as strong as each other. And, Justin tells me he finds 022 and 029 doubled die coins nearly in the same quantities and quality so the coins could possibly end up being equally as scarce.

I am personally glad that the OP brought this thread to everyone's attention and I hope it results in the CPG recognizing BOTH scarce doubled die coins as separate entries in the upcoming next edition. This will likely result in some FS-106 coins being changed by the grading services to what would then likely be CPG FS-104. The pops would adjust and it just might happen that both the FS-106 and FS-104 coins take on a value very close to one another. Or, it would not be impossible that either coin would then become worth substantially more than the other depending upon exactly how many coins show in the grading companies' pops for each variety.

As always, just my two cents.

Wondercoin

@Datentype said:
As always Mitch you are the true “Henry Kissinger“ of the coin world and a true heavyweight! As always, I am not. I look back at the time we spent in the PCGS lobby looking at coins, cracking and re-submitting etc. as some of the better times I have had as a coin dealer - things were really hopping in those days.

Lee you are a man of passion for your IKE expertise and I do appreciate your opinion. I do not troll the boards too often these days, as I like to spend my time searching vast quantities of coins instead. The 1971-s proof silver ike’s are really my first effort searching for those varieties. I looked on NGC’s variety page, PCGS blowups and the IKE group’s page and all of the coins I had sent in seemed to match the diagnostics perfectly and PCGS apparently thought so as well. No mention anywhere of the so-called peg leg.

My position is that PCGS grades and authenticates the coins and I take the good with the bad frequently. I believe they also guarantee their coins to be what they say they are so I go with that. According to you guys my coins are slabbed incorrectly. If PCGS thinks so they would give me a call. I have found stuff in the past at NGC and within the hour Rick M. would take care of business. Until then I will continue to sell my coins as they are labeled. The doubling is just as good or better and it is beyond me why they choose some and not the others as Mitch has pointed out. There is really not a huge amount of difference as far as I can tell and it does not lessen the coin in my opinion

While I would "LIKE" for the DDO-029 to be included in the CPG, I would much prefer that PCGS and NGC simply get the FS-103 and FS-106 coin attributions right in the first place. all the necessary information is on the web for proper attribution.

I believe that after receiving a response from Bill Fivaz in my latest email to PCGS and other folks, that my goal will be met.

Whether or not the CPG includes other varities doesn't really matter as long as their photographs allow for correct attributions.

I don't blame Datentype for running his listings as he was simply taking PCGS's word for it that the attributions were correct but I did feel the need to begin a campaign of pointing out the obvious differences since I've seen this before on the IKE Group and it's time for it to stop.

Goal 2 accomplished.

And yes, there is a HUGE amount of difference between the DDO-022 (FS-106) and the DDO-029. Try not to be fooled since we are, after all, numismatists with finely tuned eyes for "differences". (Otherwise, there'd be a whole lot more 55/55 Lincolns out there in addition to 1975 No S Roosevelts.)

As for resolving the CPG problems in a New York Second? Uhhh, I think not since they do not issue addendums to the CPG the last time I checked AND new editions are about 6 years apart so we're looking at a minimum of another year for the next edition. Maybe longer I don't know since I have not heard any rumblings at the IKE Group about varieties they'd like included.

cmerlo1

Good to know- thank you!

ECHOES

Thanks for your work Lee!

messydesk

Good info! We use the term "evil mimic" in the realm of VAMs to describe these varieties that aren't what you at first might think (i.e., hope) they are.