Is this 1944 D Lincoln a DDO or an altered date?
Robot1010
Posts: 255 ✭✭✭
I checked VV coppercoins and Wexlers and couldn't find a match. The 4s appear to be doubled as well as the extremely doubled 9. What are your thoughts on this one?
0
Comments
What you see on the 9 is damage, not doubling. It would not make sense for only one digit of the date to exhibit doubling to such a large degree compared to those around it.
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
Not sure why you would think this is doubling.
Looks like a vise job.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
PMD no doubling can be seen on your coin.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
DD in this case means damaged date
the fat parts you see are pushed down and squirting sideways, like a roach splats out when you step on it
1943 and 1944 have fat tail 9s. Look at the other doubled dies from that year. The 9 and the 4 have this type of doubling where the 9 is extreme. The 4 is doubled also imo. This is how doubling looks for that year
i saw what was said earlierand was just about to post pics of the 43 that has the biggest tell of thefat tail 9.
on your coin, look carefully and you'll see your roaches have been stepped on
http://varietyvista.com/01a LC Doubled Dies Vol 1/1943PDDO001.htm
Looks somewhat altered. That's why I asked. Also looks like doubling from that year. I'm no expert
Is this the doubling you are seeing? Not entirely sure from the picture but this looks like it could be machine doubling (aka "shelf" doubling because it is on a lower level from the full digits) which commands no premium.
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
when talking DD, sometimes you hear about split serifs. they are essentially split open most of the time with a gap between the doubled serifs. sometimes it's microscopic
for the 9 in 1943, there is a line inside the tail of the 9. slightly darker gray. that's the split. also notice how the entire 9 is well off the field to the same amount.
yours? you can tell it's been mashed down because that tail is closer to the field than the rest
The 9 looks damaged but the 4 seems to have notching in back and the same look and angle at the bottom of the 4. Almost looks like a match
It's probably a DDO. Yes the 9 has been smashed. But regardless, trying to ID less than uncirculated coins is futile at best. Just set it aside as a study piece and look for those you can ID.
WS
Every one of the fat tail 9s has some degree of flattening. Including the 1943 example posted before this 1944S. I could be wrong but with more doubling you might just expect more flattening on the 9. Maybe
http://varietyvista.com/01a LC Doubled Dies Vol 1/DDO 1944-S.htm
I'm in no rush to confirm what it is. Just wanted to get some opinions on it
even MS coins can have flaws and contact marks. there's something non-doubling related that explains the wide right side of the 9
same coin
i'll point out what the op is saying in opposition to my note that the 9 flattened is indicative of damage
vv says there is doubling sign here on "we" and it's flat.
ok.
hmmmm
let me ponder the 9 more
===
thank for being patient
and
thanks for continuing to point things out nicely
you got me thinking
Seeing the 9 stretch all the way to the mint mark is hard to believe yet there it is. I'm on the fence myself
I would expect more obvious damage or alteration. I'm not really seeing it. Was wondering if I'm missing something
The damage on that coin is as obvious as it comes.
doubled and damaged
yours is also damaged. doubled?
My coin looks very similar to the ones on Variety Vista. Possibly doubled
http://varietyvista.com/01a LC Doubled Dies Vol 1/1944DDDO001.htm
It looks nothing like those. Your coin is obviously damaged.
OK. Thanks for all the replies
It's damage. In 1944 the Mint applied the mintmark to the dies after they were made. Therefore, a true doubled die would not show any doubling on the mintmark.
The top of the "D" closest to the 9 looks like it shows some damage. It's a little mis-shapen near the top.
Just my opinion.
Pete
Edited
The damage on the tail of the 9 does resemble a Class VI doubled die, but you have to consider the entire context to attribute the variety. Look at the top right side of the 4s in the date, they are also heavily doubled, and do not match your coin at all. There is also doubling on LIBERTY on the two varieties you shared.
Here are pics of my Class VI 1944-D DDO, which I attributed as Die #1:
Sean Reynolds
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
I'm sure you meant to say the mint mark was applied to the dies and not the coins after they were minted. Some of the D mint coins on Variety Vista have the same look minus the circulation wear. I'm not saying this is definitely a doubled die. There are similarities to the other known doubled dies like the angle on the 4 next to the 9. The normal 4 is level at the base. I could be wrong
I'll admit the circulation wear may have ruined any chance for this being attributed if it is anything. At least there is some acknowledgement that it has its similarities. Just something I thought to get some opinions on if it was anything or nothing
Some of the D mintmarks have the same die damge at the top left
The mint mark should not be doubled because it was added to the dies. I didn't say there was doubling there. It could be nothing. I thought it was interesting
I'll see if I have a good picture of the whole coin or I may need to dig it out and take a look at liberty