1983 D CENT, RPM? UNLISTED?
Ringgy
Posts: 62 ✭✭
Hi everyone, not sure if I ever shown this coin for review, but I'm curious what the experts might think
0
Ringgy
Posts: 62 ✭✭
Comments
Very clear machine doubling. Not an RPM.
You posted the same coin over a year ago:
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1090552/1983-d-cent-unlisted-rpm-and-machine-doubling-or-just-machine-doubling#latest
No point in looking for any more RPMs or doubled dies until you learn what machine doubling is and how to recognize it.
Nice close up pic but it's just MD. Worth a cent.
Machine doubling, value - one cent 👌
Maybe the third time will be the charm.😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Ebay, a magnifying glass, and the Cherry Pickers Guide are your friends...
The hard work is done for us.
Use the guide to look for known varieties via pick up points
This approach is a YUGE waste of time.
BST: KindaNewish (3/21/21), WQuarterFreddie (3/30/21), Meltdown (4/6/21), DBSTrader2 (5/5/21) AKA- unclemonkey on Blow Out
I believe that the post you referenced was posted (in jest) after this thread was started.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
You are welcome to say that every mintmark in this time period was punched more than once (*) and therefore this has to be a repunched mintmark even though there is no sign of such.
(*) I don't know if that's true but you're welcome to say it.
However without some actual evidence, nobody is going to care.
None of the features you mention are seen on actual repunched mintmarks. What caused them is irrelevant.
>
>
Those two statements say the same thing, yet you object to the first and you're happy with the second.
Would you prefer to describe the result as a "retapped" rather than a "repunched" mintmark? You can use whatever terms you like. You shouldn't be surprised if other people don't know what you're talking about.
The coin above might indeed be struck from a die with a repunched (or retapped) mintmark. The point is that there's no evidence on the coin that that happened.
Indeed, more than half of the repunched mintmarks were produced in Denver and feature a D mintmark as this one.
A specific example (with pictures to compare and contrast) would go a long way to moving this discussion forward.
Serious question: Why do you care? You should collect whatever you like. The opinions of other people only matter when you try to sell something to other people. At that point, they're going to pay for what they like, not for what you tell them they should like.
@4Redisin I did not know the answer so I asked James Wiles and he gave me this link, which should answer your question.
http://varietyvista.com/Watershead Dates.htm
BTW, your coin shows machine doubling.
You saw and understood these issues but didn't feel it helpful to mention that? 🙄
I wonder how many people who were willing to try to help opened the thread and immediately saw some of the obvious things that most new posters incorrectly think is an error.