What are the diagnostics for 1916 matte proof lincoln?

1Mike1

I know about the sharp square rims, the crisp strike, but are there small markings from the dies that are on the coins that are unique to the 1916 only? I'm interested in photos. I searched old threads but photobucket photos no longer show up. I've googled it but the info with pictures seems elusive.

lusterlover

Robec has the details. I would link it but I stink at that.

kevinj

There were 600 Lincoln 1916 matte proofs struck, 3 different die pairs were used.
I present detailed photographs and the diagnostics for each in my book on Lincoln Cent Matte Proofs.

PQueue

Buy Kevin's well researched book.

KICK_ROCKS

@kevinj said:
There were 600 Lincoln 1916 matte proofs struck, 3 different die pairs were used.
I present detailed photographs and the diagnostics for each in my book on Lincoln Cent Matte Proofs.

Kevin I was going to purchase your book recently, but I believe the publishing's date was 2009 and another Die was identified in 2013 for the 1909 Matte? So this information would not be in your book correct? And if not will you be issuing a new updated version?

kevinj

@KICK_ROCKS said:

@kevinj said:
There were 600 Lincoln 1916 matte proofs struck, 3 different die pairs were used.
I present detailed photographs and the diagnostics for each in my book on Lincoln Cent Matte Proofs.

Kevin I was going to purchase your book recently, but I believe the publishing's date was 2009 and another Die was identified in 2013 for the 1909 Matte? So this information would not be in your book correct? And if not will you be issuing a new updated version?

Yes, there was another 1909 Matte that was found after my book printed.
I know the diagnostics for this new 1909 are somewhere in here and elsewhere.

No plans for updated version in near future, to many other books to write, someday.

We also found that one of the 1916 die pairs was used for circulation strikes, I believe it was late last year some
of our coin enthusiasts found this.

Kevin

bolivarshagnasty

@kevinj said:

@KICK_ROCKS said:

@kevinj said:
There were 600 Lincoln 1916 matte proofs struck, 3 different die pairs were used.
I present detailed photographs and the diagnostics for each in my book on Lincoln Cent Matte Proofs.

Kevin I was going to purchase your book recently, but I believe the publishing's date was 2009 and another Die was identified in 2013 for the 1909 Matte? So this information would not be in your book correct? And if not will you be issuing a new updated version?

Yes, there was another 1909 Matte that was found after my book printed.
I know the diagnostics for this new 1909 are somewhere in here and elsewhere.

No plans for updated version in near future, to many other books to write, someday.

We also found that one of the 1916 die pairs was used for circulation strikes, I believe it was late last year some
of our coin enthusiasts found this.

Kevin

Kevin, Do you have any more info on the circulation strikes that were struck with proof dies? Would explain why my 1916 had remnants of the two die scratches below the second 1 extending into the loop of the 9.

1Mike1

@kevinj said:
There were 600 Lincoln 1916 matte proofs struck, 3 different die pairs were used.
I present detailed photographs and the diagnostics for each in my book on Lincoln Cent Matte Proofs.

What is your book called (the title)?

kevinj

@1Mike1 said:

@kevinj said:
There were 600 Lincoln 1916 matte proofs struck, 3 different die pairs were used.
I present detailed photographs and the diagnostics for each in my book on Lincoln Cent Matte Proofs.

What is your book called (the title)?

Lincoln Cent Matte Proofs, was in 2009

kevinj

Kevin, Do you have any more info on the circulation strikes that were struck with proof dies? Would explain why my 1916 had remnants of the two die scratches below the second 1 extending into the loop of the 9.

This was something I wrote up about it on March 20, 2017
Discovered by David Friedlander and Bob Campbell

There recently was a 1909 VDB that was certified a Lincoln cent matte proof that did not have the diagnostics normally found on a 1909 VDB Lincoln cent matte proof.

There is one confirmed obverse working die that was used for the 1909 VDB matte proof. 1194 coins were delivered on August 2, 1909, through the archive letters, all specimens were said to have been sold. The coin has slightly granular surfaces, sharp design elements, and a good rim and edge. IMO, it was typical of an EDS from a new die. It was not
a 1909 VDB matte proof.

Sharp eyed collectors found a problem with another Lincoln cent matte proof, this time for a different reason.
It was a 1916 Lincoln cent certified as a matte proof, see attached or at the link, courtesy of Ron Guth of PCGS Coinfacts.
http://images.pcgs.com/CoinFacts/30414430_max.jpg
This coin is hereafter referred to as the 430 coin.

In 1916, there were only 600 Lincoln cent matte proofs struck and delivered, 3 strikings, 200 on each striking in
March, October, and December. The Director of the Mint ordered the discontinue of the manufacture of proof coins on October 18, 1916.

I compared this coin to Obverse #1, Reverse #1, which a specimen can also seen on PCGS Coinfacts
http://images.pcgs.com/CoinFacts/81465320_52808749_max.jpg

Analysis of the 430 coin, comparing against the 749 coin (confirmed obverse #1/reverse #1)
There is a die scratch on both which goes from the middle of the U, through the S, to the upper left of the T of TRUST.
Broken top right side of O of GOD seen on both
Not sure about die scratches in top left of W, might be obscured with toning
Date is difficult on both to see, but on the 430 coin, I see a small 60 degree angle scratch on the top inside right of the 9.
I also saw other matching die diagnostics on the obverse between the two coins.

Obverse and reverse on the 430 has strike doubling not see on die pair #1, especially on reverse. The die
could have become loose near the end of its usage though.

The obverse on 430 matches obverse #1, but what I do not like about this coin is that it does not appear to have been struck as a proof IMO, the edge appears to thin, and the inside edge appears tilted and not squared. Some of the outside lettering, IGWT, EPU do not appear to as fully struck as a proof.

The surface on the 430 is definitely granular.

This is the same obverse as 1916 Lincoln cent matte proof obverse #1, but it is not a proof as it was not struck as a proof.

Brian Wagner (copied herein) independently came to the same conclusion as did others who first uncovered this.

IMO, what probably happened is that two pair of dies were allocated for Lincoln cent matte proofs in 1916.
When the Director stated in October 1916 that no more proofs would be struck, then one of the dies was taken from the medal room (where proofs were normally struck during this period), to be used in production for coins struck for circulation. This is the first time that I have seen one of the Lincoln cent matte proof dies used for coins struck for circulation. A confirming specimen would be helpful to verify that this was not just a poorly struck proof.

Kevin

1Mike1

@kevinj said:

@1Mike1 said:

@kevinj said:
There were 600 Lincoln 1916 matte proofs struck, 3 different die pairs were used.
I present detailed photographs and the diagnostics for each in my book on Lincoln Cent Matte Proofs.

What is your book called (the title)?

Lincoln Cent Matte Proofs, was in 2009

Thank you, just sent the order.

bolivarshagnasty

@kevinj said:

Kevin, Do you have any more info on the circulation strikes that were struck with proof dies? Would explain why my 1916 had remnants of the two die scratches below the second 1 extending into the loop of the 9.

This was something I wrote up about it on March 20, 2017
Discovered by David Friedlander and Bob Campbell

There recently was a 1909 VDB that was certified a Lincoln cent matte proof that did not have the diagnostics normally found on a 1909 VDB Lincoln cent matte proof.

There is one confirmed obverse working die that was used for the 1909 VDB matte proof. 1194 coins were delivered on August 2, 1909, through the archive letters, all specimens were said to have been sold. The coin has slightly granular surfaces, sharp design elements, and a good rim and edge. IMO, it was typical of an EDS from a new die. It was not
a 1909 VDB matte proof.

Sharp eyed collectors found a problem with another Lincoln cent matte proof, this time for a different reason.
It was a 1916 Lincoln cent certified as a matte proof, see attached or at the link, courtesy of Ron Guth of PCGS Coinfacts.
http://images.pcgs.com/CoinFacts/30414430_max.jpg
This coin is hereafter referred to as the 430 coin.

In 1916, there were only 600 Lincoln cent matte proofs struck and delivered, 3 strikings, 200 on each striking in
March, October, and December. The Director of the Mint ordered the discontinue of the manufacture of proof coins on October 18, 1916.

I compared this coin to Obverse #1, Reverse #1, which a specimen can also seen on PCGS Coinfacts
http://images.pcgs.com/CoinFacts/81465320_52808749_max.jpg

Analysis of the 430 coin, comparing against the 749 coin (confirmed obverse #1/reverse #1)
There is a die scratch on both which goes from the middle of the U, through the S, to the upper left of the T of TRUST.
Broken top right side of O of GOD seen on both
Not sure about die scratches in top left of W, might be obscured with toning
Date is difficult on both to see, but on the 430 coin, I see a small 60 degree angle scratch on the top inside right of the 9.
I also saw other matching die diagnostics on the obverse between the two coins.

Obverse and reverse on the 430 has strike doubling not see on die pair #1, especially on reverse. The die
could have become loose near the end of its usage though.

The obverse on 430 matches obverse #1, but what I do not like about this coin is that it does not appear to have been struck as a proof IMO, the edge appears to thin, and the inside edge appears tilted and not squared. Some of the outside lettering, IGWT, EPU do not appear to as fully struck as a proof.

The surface on the 430 is definitely granular.

This is the same obverse as 1916 Lincoln cent matte proof obverse #1, but it is not a proof as it was not struck as a proof.

Brian Wagner (copied herein) independently came to the same conclusion as did others who first uncovered this.

IMO, what probably happened is that two pair of dies were allocated for Lincoln cent matte proofs in 1916.
When the Director stated in October 1916 that no more proofs would be struck, then one of the dies was taken from the medal room (where proofs were normally struck during this period), to be used in production for coins struck for circulation. This is the first time that I have seen one of the Lincoln cent matte proof dies used for coins struck for circulation. A confirming specimen would be helpful to verify that this was not just a poorly struck proof.

Kevin

Thanks for the reply Kevin. I probably have a 16 that matches the 430 described above. Lot of the Proof characteristics, less the square rims. Can you tell me if the proofs were struck more than once, or higher pressures. Would they have modified the dies to resemble business strike rims?

kevinj

@1Mike1 said:

@kevinj said:

@1Mike1 said:

@kevinj said:
There were 600 Lincoln 1916 matte proofs struck, 3 different die pairs were used.
I present detailed photographs and the diagnostics for each in my book on Lincoln Cent Matte Proofs.

What is your book called (the title)?

Lincoln Cent Matte Proofs, was in 2009

Thank you, just sent the order.

Hi Mike,
Thanks for the order, where did you send to, hopefully Troy VA, if not send me an email at kevinjflynn88@yahoo.com
Thanks
Kevin

KICK_ROCKS

@bolivarshagnasty said:

@kevinj said:

Kevin, Do you have any more info on the circulation strikes that were struck with proof dies? Would explain why my 1916 had remnants of the two die scratches below the second 1 extending into the loop of the 9.

This was something I wrote up about it on March 20, 2017
Discovered by David Friedlander and Bob Campbell

There recently was a 1909 VDB that was certified a Lincoln cent matte proof that did not have the diagnostics normally found on a 1909 VDB Lincoln cent matte proof.

There is one confirmed obverse working die that was used for the 1909 VDB matte proof. 1194 coins were delivered on August 2, 1909, through the archive letters, all specimens were said to have been sold. The coin has slightly granular surfaces, sharp design elements, and a good rim and edge. IMO, it was typical of an EDS from a new die. It was not
a 1909 VDB matte proof.

Sharp eyed collectors found a problem with another Lincoln cent matte proof, this time for a different reason.
It was a 1916 Lincoln cent certified as a matte proof, see attached or at the link, courtesy of Ron Guth of PCGS Coinfacts.
http://images.pcgs.com/CoinFacts/30414430_max.jpg
This coin is hereafter referred to as the 430 coin.

In 1916, there were only 600 Lincoln cent matte proofs struck and delivered, 3 strikings, 200 on each striking in
March, October, and December. The Director of the Mint ordered the discontinue of the manufacture of proof coins on October 18, 1916.

I compared this coin to Obverse #1, Reverse #1, which a specimen can also seen on PCGS Coinfacts
http://images.pcgs.com/CoinFacts/81465320_52808749_max.jpg

Analysis of the 430 coin, comparing against the 749 coin (confirmed obverse #1/reverse #1)
There is a die scratch on both which goes from the middle of the U, through the S, to the upper left of the T of TRUST.
Broken top right side of O of GOD seen on both
Not sure about die scratches in top left of W, might be obscured with toning
Date is difficult on both to see, but on the 430 coin, I see a small 60 degree angle scratch on the top inside right of the 9.
I also saw other matching die diagnostics on the obverse between the two coins.

Obverse and reverse on the 430 has strike doubling not see on die pair #1, especially on reverse. The die
could have become loose near the end of its usage though.

The obverse on 430 matches obverse #1, but what I do not like about this coin is that it does not appear to have been struck as a proof IMO, the edge appears to thin, and the inside edge appears tilted and not squared. Some of the outside lettering, IGWT, EPU do not appear to as fully struck as a proof.

The surface on the 430 is definitely granular.

This is the same obverse as 1916 Lincoln cent matte proof obverse #1, but it is not a proof as it was not struck as a proof.

Brian Wagner (copied herein) independently came to the same conclusion as did others who first uncovered this.

IMO, what probably happened is that two pair of dies were allocated for Lincoln cent matte proofs in 1916.
When the Director stated in October 1916 that no more proofs would be struck, then one of the dies was taken from the medal room (where proofs were normally struck during this period), to be used in production for coins struck for circulation. This is the first time that I have seen one of the Lincoln cent matte proof dies used for coins struck for circulation. A confirming specimen would be helpful to verify that this was not just a poorly struck proof.

Kevin

Thanks for the reply Kevin. I probably have a 16 that matches the 430 described above. Lot of the Proof characteristics, less the square rims. Can you tell me if the proofs were struck more than once, or higher pressures. Would they have modified the dies to resemble business strike rims?

Beautiful coin I must say.

kevinj

Thanks for the reply Kevin. I probably have a 16 that matches the 430 described above. Lot of the Proof characteristics, less the square rims. Can you tell me if the proofs were struck more than once, or higher pressures. Would they have modified the dies to resemble business strike rims?

Matte proofs were struck once, slower at higher pressure. Going slower gave more time for the metal to flow into the deepest recesses of the working dies.

On the 16s, there were 3 deliveries, 200 each.

No, they would not have modified the rims for circulation, is just if full production mode, less time and pressure used
which will not fully fill the rims.

In my study of the mattes, I have seen circulation strikes that had stronger rims that the proofs, especially on the
1911, small coin, less pressure required.....

Kevin

1Mike1

@kevinj said:

@1Mike1 said:

@kevinj said:

@1Mike1 said:

@kevinj said:
There were 600 Lincoln 1916 matte proofs struck, 3 different die pairs were used.
I present detailed photographs and the diagnostics for each in my book on Lincoln Cent Matte Proofs.

What is your book called (the title)?

Lincoln Cent Matte Proofs, was in 2009

Thank you, just sent the order.

Hi Mike,
Thanks for the order, where did you send to, hopefully Troy VA, if not send me an email at kevinjflynn88@yahoo.com
Thanks
Kevin

Oh sorry I bought it online from Wizard coin supply. I didn't realize you were personally selling them.

kevinj

Oh sorry I bought it online from Wizard (something). I didn't realize you were personally selling them.

All good, just wanted to make sure in case you ordered from me
Hope you enjoy
Kevin