1951 Dime!

chattycoins · March 2, 2026 12:35AM

Hey people! What do you think of this? Thanks for hanging in there with me! What can I use to clean this coin up? Thanks again!

IkesT · March 2, 2026 12:45AM

It's a horrible, damaged coin; just sell it for the silver value and leave it at that.

lcutler · March 2, 2026 12:48AM

Generally, it's not a good idea to "clean up" collectable coins. Collectors prefer original surfaces so improper cleaning can lower the value. This coin however is heavily damaged, the edge has been peened or rolled in so is only worth silver value anyway, it will still be worth silver value even if it is cleaned.

yosclimber · March 2, 2026 12:57AM

This is actually a 1954-D.

As @lcutler said, the height of the rim has been raised by peening with a spoon, hammer or similar, so it only has bullion value. This also makes the outer edge smooth.
Compare it with a normal Roosevelt dime which has a lower rim, larger diameter and a reeded edge which is not smooth (it has vertical grooves).

The silver bulliion value of a dime like this is currently $6.90 , which is pretty good compared to about $2 a year ago.
https://www.coinflation.com/silver_coin_values.html

johnny9434 · March 2, 2026 2:11AM

Donate it to a charity

jmlanzaf · March 2, 2026 3:15AM

Acetone might lighten up the color, if you want.

It had been "spooned". So, as others have said, it's just worth the silver value. But if you find it interesting, no harm in keeping it.

Ronsanderson · March 2, 2026 3:55AM

Just because it’s so damaged, you cannot lose value by cleaning it. So go ahead and try. I might put it in a pocket of my jeans (like the coin pocket where it won’t fall out) and run it through the laundry.

There are much better ways to conserve by carefully cleaning, but the extra caution is really unwarranted for a coin that already has no numismatic value. It still might be a keeper just because it looks so strange with the rolled-up rim. If it’s just something that intrigues you, the cleaning is just a matter of taste.

TPring · March 2, 2026 7:23AM

Morgan White · March 2, 2026 7:37AM

At some point, continuing to post obviously damaged coins to anyone with common sense, is going to be perceived as trolling. Personally, I think we're already past that point.

mr1931S · March 2, 2026 8:11AM

@jmlanzaf said:
Acetone might lighten up the color, if you want.

It had been "spooned". So, as others have said, it's just worth the silver value. But if you find it interesting, no harm in keeping it.

Acetone ain't going to do a thing to "lighten up the color," as you say. Why are you encouraging this newbie to use acetone on this coin? Acetone is expensive. Would be better to use a "bright dip" on this dime to "lighten it up."

JBK · March 2, 2026 8:14AM

@mr1931S said:

@jmlanzaf said:
Acetone might lighten up the color, if you want.

It had been "spooned". So, as others have said, it's just worth the silver value. But if you find it interesting, no harm in keeping it.

**Acetone ain't going to do a thing to "lighten up the color,"*** as you say. Why are you encouraging this newbie to use acetone on this coin? Acetone is expensive. Would be better to use a "bright dip" on this dime to "lighten it up."

It appears there is some foreign matter on the surface, i.e. grime or goop. So, acetone would take that off.

mr1931S · March 2, 2026 8:22AM

I actually owned a "spooned" 1895-O dime at one point in my many years as a collector. It was a nice piece with VF detail that someone decided to spoon so it would fit into a bezel. I put it in my Barber dime album. My '95-O dime was a rattler before rattlers were cool.

jmlanzaf · March 2, 2026 9:00AM

@mr1931S said:

@jmlanzaf said:
Acetone might lighten up the color, if you want.

It had been "spooned". So, as others have said, it's just worth the silver value. But if you find it interesting, no harm in keeping it.

Acetone ain't going to do a thing to "lighten up the color," as you say. Why are you encouraging this newbie to use acetone on this coin? Acetone is expensive. Would be better to use a "bright dip" on this dime to "lighten it up."

Acetone will remove the surface grime. Dip is a more extreme treatment. For that dime, no harm. But encouraging newbies to dip coins will result in more harm than a simple little Acetone wash ever well. Don't start with the Harsche treatment.

TPring · March 2, 2026 9:16AM

Chatty, did you ever remove what is on your 1949 cent?

MsMorrisine · March 2, 2026 11:09AM

waste of acetone on that coin

it is essentially damaged, would be called a cull, and is worth only the silver value -- if you can get that these days

crazyhounddog · March 2, 2026 11:34AM

Damaged sell it for melt.

mr1931S · March 2, 2026 11:51AM

@crazyhounddog said:
Damaged sell it for melt.

Maybe the piece has significance to the owner. All he was asking for in the OP was how could he "clean it up". Coins are not always all about "how much can I get for it?", are they?

Stay tuned for my "dirty bird" thread, coming soon to a coin forum near you.

Teaser: "Dirty bird" is in a PCGS holder and is unbelievably cool.

mr1931S · March 2, 2026 12:17PM

@jmlanzaf said:

@mr1931S said:

@jmlanzaf said:
Acetone might lighten up the color, if you want.

It had been "spooned". So, as others have said, it's just worth the silver value. But if you find it interesting, no harm in keeping it.

Acetone ain't going to do a thing to "lighten up the color," as you say. Why are you encouraging this newbie to use acetone on this coin? Acetone is expensive. Would be better to use a "bright dip" on this dime to "lighten it up."

Acetone will remove the surface grime. Dip is a more extreme treatment. For that dime, no harm. But encouraging newbies to dip coins will result in more harm than a simple little Acetone wash ever well. Don't start with the Harsche treatment.

Or what?? Do you have a copy of "How to Detect Altered and Counterfeit Coins" to refer to? If not, I recommend you get ahold of a copy soon. Getting very hard, almost impossible to find in nice condition. I have 3rd, 5th and 6th (the last) edition of the groundbreaking "How to Detect Altered and Counterfeit Coins" by Bert Harsche.

For the longest time I wondered where I could find 1st and/or 2nd edition of Harsche's publication because I could never find either for sale. I have concluded that the 1st and 2nd editions are drafts that never were published. The 6th and last edition, cover of which is seen here, was published in 1978.

IkesT · March 2, 2026 12:37PM

@mr1931S said:

@jmlanzaf said:

@mr1931S said:

@jmlanzaf said:
Acetone might lighten up the color, if you want.

It had been "spooned". So, as others have said, it's just worth the silver value. But if you find it interesting, no harm in keeping it.

Acetone ain't going to do a thing to "lighten up the color," as you say. Why are you encouraging this newbie to use acetone on this coin? Acetone is expensive. Would be better to use a "bright dip" on this dime to "lighten it up."

Acetone will remove the surface grime. Dip is a more extreme treatment. For that dime, no harm. But encouraging newbies to dip coins will result in more harm than a simple little Acetone wash ever well. Don't start with the Harsche treatment.

Or what?? Do you have a copy of "How to Detect Altered and Counterfeit Coins" to refer to? If not, I recommend you get ahold of a copy soon.

They make great kindling! 👍

For the longest time I wondered where I could find 1st and/or 2nd edition of Harsche's publication because I could never find either for sale. I have concluded that the 1st and 2nd editions are drafts that never were published.

And here I thought you were supposed to be the Harsche expert...They did publish a first and second edition, but I believe most of them were burned...:

mr1931S · March 2, 2026 4:53PM

I'm giving serious consideration to publishing a Detecting Altered and Counterfeit Coins addenda for the section where Harsche discusses 1909-S V.D.B. counterfeits.

The addenda would show the 1909-S obverse used to make the very first 1909-S V.D.B.s. Harsche never saw an example of. That's why Harsche lists, with images in all editions of his publication, only 3 of the 4 known obverse dies used to make 1909-S cent coupled with the V.D.B. reverse designed by Brenner. I located two examples out of well over a hundred mint-state or near mint state 1909-S V.D.B. pieces. I found the two in PCGS' library of images of 1909-S V.D.B.s that they have certified. V-1 for Victor 1. Very historic, very rare (probably less than 1000 pieces extant). And very expensive. I wonder if the owner even realizes how historically significant his or her 1909-S V.D.B., coming from the V-1 obverse die, really is.

IkesT · March 2, 2026 5:12PM

@mr1931S said:
I'm giving serious consideration to publishing a Detecting Altered and Counterfeit Coins addenda for the section where Harsche discusses 1909-S V.D.B. counterfeits.

The addenda would show the 1909-S obverse used to make the very first 1909-S V.D.B.s. Harsche never saw an example of. That's why Harsche lists, with images in all editions of his publication, only 3 of the 4 known obverse dies used to make 1909-S cent coupled with the V.D.B. reverse designed by Brenner. I located two out of well over a hundred mint-state or near mint state pieces. I found the two in PCGS' library of images of 1909-S V.D.B.s that they have certified. Very historic, very rare (probably less than 1000 pieces extant). And very expensive. I wonder if the owner even realizes how historically significant his or her 1909-S V.D.B. is.

Well, it sounds like you have a lot more work to do...

For example, you didn't know how many Harsche editions there were until a few minutes ago. You'd need my help with the research, but I'm not so sure that I'd want to be a co-author with you. You'd also need my help to tell the different dies apart. Sounds like a lot of the project would rely on me, which I'm not too comfortable with...

Morgan White · March 2, 2026 5:23PM

@IkesT said:

@mr1931S said:
I'm giving serious consideration to publishing a Detecting Altered and Counterfeit Coins addenda for the section where Harsche discusses 1909-S V.D.B. counterfeits.

The addenda would show the 1909-S obverse used to make the very first 1909-S V.D.B.s. Harsche never saw an example of. That's why Harsche lists, with images in all editions of his publication, only 3 of the 4 known obverse dies used to make 1909-S cent coupled with the V.D.B. reverse designed by Brenner. I located two out of well over a hundred mint-state or near mint state pieces. I found the two in PCGS' library of images of 1909-S V.D.B.s that they have certified. Very historic, very rare (probably less than 1000 pieces extant). And very expensive. I wonder if the owner even realizes how historically significant his or her 1909-S V.D.B. is.

Well, it sounds like you have a lot more work to do...

For example, you didn't know how many Harsche editions there were until a few minutes ago. You'd need my help with the research, but I'm not so sure that I'd want to be a co-author with you. You'd also need my help to tell the different dies apart. Sounds like a lot of the project would rely on me, which I'm not too comfortable with...

IkesT · March 2, 2026 5:38PM

@Morgan White said:

@IkesT said:

@mr1931S said:
I'm giving serious consideration to publishing a Detecting Altered and Counterfeit Coins addenda for the section where Harsche discusses 1909-S V.D.B. counterfeits.

The addenda would show the 1909-S obverse used to make the very first 1909-S V.D.B.s. Harsche never saw an example of. That's why Harsche lists, with images in all editions of his publication, only 3 of the 4 known obverse dies used to make 1909-S cent coupled with the V.D.B. reverse designed by Brenner. I located two out of well over a hundred mint-state or near mint state pieces. I found the two in PCGS' library of images of 1909-S V.D.B.s that they have certified. Very historic, very rare (probably less than 1000 pieces extant). And very expensive. I wonder if the owner even realizes how historically significant his or her 1909-S V.D.B. is.

Well, it sounds like you have a lot more work to do...

For example, you didn't know how many Harsche editions there were until a few minutes ago. You'd need my help with the research, but I'm not so sure that I'd want to be a co-author with you. You'd also need my help to tell the different dies apart. Sounds like a lot of the project would rely on me, which I'm not too comfortable with...

I know that mr1931S wants us to work together, and I can see that you, the public, are clamoring for it. Perhaps we can streamline the project to make it more feasible.

Let's face it, old habits are hard to change, and the public has been in the habit of using old copies of Harsche as kindling for over 40 years now. So why bother writing a whole new book when people are just going to burn it anyway? Let's get a supply of the same paper Harsche used, bind it together in bundles, and sell it as is; that way, people can still burn the blank bundles and we don't have to write anything. 👍

mr1931S · March 2, 2026 5:56PM

For everybody's information, the pamphlet cover shown in the image seen above is an alteration. "3rd EDITION" has been removed. The image of the page indicating "SECOND EDITION" is a TOTAL fabrication. Mark Hoffman, master forger, would be embarrassed to claim such hack alterations and fabrications as his work. Mark Hoffman, as some readers here might remember, is the forger who claims to have created the unique 1959-D Lincoln cent with a wheat ears reverse. Hoffman is more famous, or rather, infamous as it were, however, as creator of fake Mormon currency that fooled experts. Read about Hoffman and more in "Numismatic Forgery," a book that I guarantee will scare the bejeebers out of you. "Numismatic Forgery" by Charles M. Larson should have a place in every numismatist's library.

Newbie or veteran, no matter. Get your copy of Harsche (when available for purchase, under $20 although I had to pay more than $20 for my copy of 6th edition. It was about $25, as I recall) and also get your copy of Larson's "Numismatic Forgery." I see a few copies of it available for purchase on ebay for around $25.

PCGS' Official Guide to Coin Grading and Counterfeit Detection, edited by Scott A Travers with Text by John W. Dannreuther is another winner counterfeit detection guide, almost needless to say.

IkesT · March 2, 2026 6:07PM

@mr1931S said:
For everybody's information, the pamphlet cover shown in the image seen above is an alteration. "3rd EDITION" has been removed. The image of the page indicating "SECOND EDITION" is a TOTAL fabrication. Mark Hoffman, master forger, would be embarrassed to claim such hack alterations and fabrications as his work. Mark Hoffman, as some readers here might remember, is the forger who claims to have created the unique 1959-D Lincoln cent with a wheat ears reverse. Hoffman is more famous, or infamous, however, as creator of fake Mormon currency that fooled experts.

If we are going to be colleagues and maintain a positive working relationship, I must ask you to please stop accusing me of forgery.

The photos of the Second Edition of Detecting Altered Coins are clipped from an original eBay listing that was archived on Worthpoint (see: https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/detecting-altered-coins-bert-harsche-4641589989 ). I will add that Worthpoint is not my website, nor do I have any editorial privileges there.

Morgan White · March 2, 2026 6:15PM

@IkesT said:

@mr1931S said:
For everybody's information, the pamphlet cover shown in the image seen above is an alteration. "3rd EDITION" has been removed. The image of the page indicating "SECOND EDITION" is a TOTAL fabrication. Mark Hoffman, master forger, would be embarrassed to claim such hack alterations and fabrications as his work. Mark Hoffman, as some readers here might remember, is the forger who claims to have created the unique 1959-D Lincoln cent with a wheat ears reverse. Hoffman is more famous, or infamous, however, as creator of fake Mormon currency that fooled experts.

If we are going to be colleagues and maintain a positive working relationship, I must ask you to please stop accusing me of forgery.

The photos of the Second Edition of Detecting Altered Coins are clipped from an original eBay listing that was archived on Worthpoint (see: https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/detecting-altered-coins-bert-harsche-4641589989 ). I will add that Worthpoint is not my website, nor do I have any editorial privileges there.

Steven59 · March 2, 2026 6:20PM

Your coin is only worth the $6.40 of silver in it - no mater what you do with it will not change that fact so just leave it as is - ya can't polish a turd.

mr1931S · March 2, 2026 6:21PM

I see that all the usual yuk-it-ups are here in Dodge this evening. I would bet all my V.D.B.s (except for my PCGS certified S V.D.B.) that not a single one of these yuk-it-ups owns ANY of the counterfeit detection references I have discussed here.

mr1931S · March 2, 2026 6:31PM

The yuk-it-up followers are careful not to upstage the master. Imitate to a degree, sure. But upstage? Never. The pecking order (roughly, as measured by post count) does not allow for it.

MsMorrisine · March 2, 2026 6:32PM

@mr1931S said:
I see that all the usual yuk-it-ups are here in Dodge this evening. I would bet all my V.D.B.s (except for my PCGS certified S V.D.B.) that not a single one of these yuk-it-ups owns ANY of the counterfeit detection references I have discussed here.

i prefer up-to-date guides

IkesT · March 2, 2026 6:46PM

@mr1931S - In 2021, on your own thread, @Steven59 posted a photo of the second, third, fourth, and fifth editions of Detecting Altered Coins ; the second edition is on the upper right:
.
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/comment/13130395/#Comment_13130395
.

.
Are you suggesting that I traveled back in time to 2021 and forced Steven to post a forged photo?

If so, that is not very collegial, and I would like to speak with Sheila, our human resources person.

mr1931S · March 2, 2026 7:03PM

Am I invited to speak with Sheila? The three of us could have a discussion about Rockwells.
I'm suspicious about 2nd edition even existing as you are presenting it. We've all seen plenty of altered images here. My own experience is I've never managed to find a copy to buy of 1st or 2nd Harsche. That's all I have to say on this matter of Harsche editions preceding the 3rd.

IkesT · March 2, 2026 7:18PM

@mr1931S said:
Am I invited to speak with Sheila?

Why don't you just ask Steven?

Hey, @Steven59 - did a future version of me make you post that photo back in 2021, or did you just post it yourself from a contemporary listing on eBay?

Namely, this one:

https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/detecting-altered-coins-booklets-bert-3783678021

lermish · March 2, 2026 7:20PM

@mr1931S said:
For everybody's information, the pamphlet cover shown in the image seen above is an alteration. "3rd EDITION" has been removed. The image of the page indicating "SECOND EDITION" is a TOTAL fabrication. Mark Hoffman, master forger, would be embarrassed to claim such hack alterations and fabrications as his work. Mark Hoffman, as some readers here might remember, is the forger who claims to have created the unique 1959-D Lincoln cent with a wheat ears reverse. Hoffman is more famous, or rather, infamous as it were, however, as creator of fake Mormon currency that fooled experts. Read about Hoffman and more in "Numismatic Forgery," a book that I guarantee will scare the bejeebers out of you. "Numismatic Forgery" by Charles M. Larson should have a place in every numismatist's library.

Newbie or veteran, no matter. Get your copy of Harsche (when available for purchase, under $20 although I had to pay more than $20 for my copy of 6th edition. It was about $25, as I recall) and also get your copy of Larson's "Numismatic Forgery." I see a few copies of it available for purchase on ebay for around $25.

PCGS' Official Guide to Coin Grading and Counterfeit Detection, edited by Scott A Travers with Text by John W. Dannreuther is another winner counterfeit detection guide, almost needless to say.

Morgan White · March 2, 2026 7:21PM

There were some funny memes in that other thread.

mr1931S · March 2, 2026 7:33PM

Yes, my first 1909-S V.D.B. was indeed a fake. Fooled PCGS, fooled the dealer I bought it from, fooled me. Harsche eventually became useful when I realized, thanks to what I was seeing in Harsche, that the 'S' mintmark was in a wrong place for 1909-S V.D.B.

IkesT · March 2, 2026 7:55PM

@mr1931S said:
Am I invited to speak with Sheila? The three of us could have a discussion about Rockwells.

By the way, Sheila is the human resources lady in our work office where we are assembling the bundles of Harsche kindling paper.

I think she would be confused that you wanted to talk with her about Rockwell paintings.

mr1931S · March 2, 2026 8:15PM

No matter how finely I registered the 's' with the bottom of the nines in the date, I would see slight shifting of the 's' on images of some of the coins being analyzed when compared to the firmly established standard positions, the four known 's' positions used to make 1909-S V.D.B. Could well be that's a new variety of 1909-S obverse I'm looking at but I can't prove it with a coin or coins of interest not in hand. I made a slide show for 1909-S V.D.B. 's' positions using Powerpoint. Nine different 1909-S obverse dies are known to have been used to make 1909-S Lincoln pennies both with and without V.D.B. reverse. Four of the nine were used to make 1909-S V.D.B. The four known 's' positions for 1909-S V.D.B., i call them Victor 1-4. It was a fair amount of work making that slideshow but consider the time and effort expended to get such a pleasing result to be well worth it.

Steven59 · March 2, 2026 8:37PM

@IkesT said:
Hey, @Steven59 - did a future version of me make you post that photo back in 2021, or did you just post it yourself from a contemporary listing on eBay?

Namely, this one:

https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/detecting-altered-coins-booklets-bert-3783678021

.
Wow! Was that 2021???? It seems just like yesterday ---------

MsMorrisine · March 2, 2026 8:42PM

@Steven59 said:
Wow! Was that 2021???? It seems just like yesterday ---------

we're working on a second edition right now

mr1931S · March 3, 2026 6:45AM

@mr1931S said:
Am I invited to speak with Sheila? The three of us could have a discussion about Rockwells.
I'm suspicious about 2nd edition even existing as you are presenting it. We've all seen plenty of altered images here. My own experience is I've never managed to find a copy to buy of 1st or 2nd Harsche. That's all I have to say on this matter of Harsche editions preceding the 3rd.

I would add this:
I suspect that 2nd edition Harsche does not have section on 1909-S and 1909-S V.D.B. cents. I would be convinced of 2nd edition Harsche's existence if I could get one in my hands. It's a mystery at this point, far as I'm concerned. The 3rd edition, copyright 1964, is the first recognized-by-me published work on identifying obverse die varieties of 1909-S Lincoln cents so unless and until I'm proven wrong about this that's what we go with. If 2nd edition , copyright 1963, shows all those different obverses for 1909-S Lincoln cents, then we can credit Harsche with one year earlier than previously thought being first published, can't we?

lermish · March 3, 2026 7:02AM

@mr1931S said:

@mr1931S said:
Am I invited to speak with Sheila? The three of us could have a discussion about Rockwells.
I'm suspicious about 2nd edition even existing as you are presenting it. We've all seen plenty of altered images here. My own experience is I've never managed to find a copy to buy of 1st or 2nd Harsche. That's all I have to say on this matter of Harsche editions preceding the 3rd.

I would add this:
I suspect that 2nd edition Harsche does not have section on 1909-S and 1909-S V.D.B. cents. I would be convinced of 2nd edition Harsche's existence if I could get one in my hands. It's a mystery at this point, far as I'm concerned. The 3rd edition, copyright 1964, is the first recognized-by-me published work on identifying obverse die varieties of 1909-S Lincoln cents so unless and until I'm proven wrong about this that's what we go with. If 2nd edition , copyright 1963, shows all those different obverses for 1909-S Lincoln cents, then we can credit Harsche with one year earlier than previously thought being first published, can't we?

We? Who is we? There is no we. You are alone on an island like a leper.

No one cares even a little bit other than giving you a hard time...which you have well and truly earned.

mr1931S · March 3, 2026 7:04AM

@MsMorrisine said:

@mr1931S said:
I see that all the usual yuk-it-ups are here in Dodge this evening. I would bet all my V.D.B.s (except for my PCGS certified S V.D.B.) that not a single one of these yuk-it-ups owns ANY of the counterfeit detection references I have discussed here.

i prefer up-to-date guides

Up-to-date? What does that mean in the context of proven-to-be-accurate numismatic findings made in years gone by? Do we throw the old work away? You've said some outrageous things here Morrisine but this "up-to-date" remark you've made, as seen above, takes the cake.

2windy2fish · March 3, 2026 7:11AM

@chattycoins reading this thread…

Morgan White · March 3, 2026 8:13AM

@lermish said:

@mr1931S said:

@mr1931S said:
Am I invited to speak with Sheila? The three of us could have a discussion about Rockwells.
I'm suspicious about 2nd edition even existing as you are presenting it. We've all seen plenty of altered images here. My own experience is I've never managed to find a copy to buy of 1st or 2nd Harsche. That's all I have to say on this matter of Harsche editions preceding the 3rd.

I would add this:
I suspect that 2nd edition Harsche does not have section on 1909-S and 1909-S V.D.B. cents. I would be convinced of 2nd edition Harsche's existence if I could get one in my hands. It's a mystery at this point, far as I'm concerned. The 3rd edition, copyright 1964, is the first recognized-by-me published work on identifying obverse die varieties of 1909-S Lincoln cents so unless and until I'm proven wrong about this that's what we go with. If 2nd edition , copyright 1963, shows all those different obverses for 1909-S Lincoln cents, then we can credit Harsche with one year earlier than previously thought being first published, can't we?

We? Who is we? There is no we. You are alone on an island like a leper.

No one cares even a little bit other than giving you a hard time...which you have well and truly earned.

mr1931S · March 3, 2026 12:27PM

@lermish said:

@mr1931S said:

@mr1931S said:
Am I invited to speak with Sheila? The three of us could have a discussion about Rockwells.
I'm suspicious about 2nd edition even existing as you are presenting it. We've all seen plenty of altered images here. My own experience is I've never managed to find a copy to buy of 1st or 2nd Harsche. That's all I have to say on this matter of Harsche editions preceding the 3rd.

I would add this:
I suspect that 2nd edition Harsche does not have section on 1909-S and 1909-S V.D.B. cents. I would be convinced of 2nd edition Harsche's existence if I could get one in my hands. It's a mystery at this point, far as I'm concerned. The 3rd edition, copyright 1964, is the first recognized-by-me published work on identifying obverse die varieties of 1909-S Lincoln cents so unless and until I'm proven wrong about this that's what we go with. If 2nd edition , copyright 1963, shows all those different obverses for 1909-S Lincoln cents, then we can credit Harsche with one year earlier than previously thought being first published, can't we?

We? Who is we? There is no we. You are alone on an island like a leper.

No one cares even a little bit other than giving you a hard time...which you have well and truly earned.

Leave yourself out of "we" then. I've got more support here than you might think. "We" is the silent majority. We don't know everything there is to know but we do know this: Going the route of participating in this forum's staggering buffoonery instigated by a few, a very few, is most undignified of you, huffy one.

Since Harsche's six, three more 1909-S obverses have been discovered. There are presently nine obverse die varieties now known to have been used to make 1909-S Lincoln cents both with and without V.D.B. I have been endeavoring to find additional ones which there most surely are. My Powerpoint Victor slideshow project has been helpful but is no substitute for coin-in-hand inspection.

I've got some exciting threads unrelated to 1909-S pennies coming up here for veterans and newbies alike to enjoy but ask that you not post in them if you can't control your propensity for huffiness. Change the channel if you don't like what it's showing is my recommendation for you.

lermish · March 3, 2026 3:05PM

@mr1931S said:

@lermish said:

@mr1931S said:

@mr1931S said:
Am I invited to speak with Sheila? The three of us could have a discussion about Rockwells.
I'm suspicious about 2nd edition even existing as you are presenting it. We've all seen plenty of altered images here. My own experience is I've never managed to find a copy to buy of 1st or 2nd Harsche. That's all I have to say on this matter of Harsche editions preceding the 3rd.

I would add this:
I suspect that 2nd edition Harsche does not have section on 1909-S and 1909-S V.D.B. cents. I would be convinced of 2nd edition Harsche's existence if I could get one in my hands. It's a mystery at this point, far as I'm concerned. The 3rd edition, copyright 1964, is the first recognized-by-me published work on identifying obverse die varieties of 1909-S Lincoln cents so unless and until I'm proven wrong about this that's what we go with. If 2nd edition , copyright 1963, shows all those different obverses for 1909-S Lincoln cents, then we can credit Harsche with one year earlier than previously thought being first published, can't we?

We? Who is we? There is no we. You are alone on an island like a leper.

No one cares even a little bit other than giving you a hard time...which you have well and truly earned.

Leave yourself out of "we" then. I've got more support here than you might think. "We" is the silent majority. We don't know everything there is to know but we do know this: Going the route of participating in this forum's staggering buffoonery instigated by a few, a very few, is most undignified of you, huffy one.

FACT: Bert Harsche's 3rd edition of "Detecting Altered Coins" ©1964 is the first published work that attempts to identify the obverse die varieties of the 1909-S Lincoln cent.

Since Harsche's six, three more 1909-S obverses have been discovered. There are presently nine obverse die varieties now known to have been used to make 1909-S Lincoln cents both with and without V.D.B. I have been endeavoring to find additional ones which there most surely are. My Powerpoint Victor slideshow project has been helpful but is no substitute for coin-in-hand inspection.

I've got some exciting threads unrelated to 1909-S pennies coming up here for veterans and newbies alike to enjoy but ask that you not post in them if you can't control your propensity for huffiness. Change the channel if you don't like what it's showing is my recommendation for you.

The silent majority is smarter than me; they ignore your posts because your posts are nearly entirely absurd. They are not waiting with baited breath for your next round of misinformation.

FACT: Your nonsense, unsubstantiated/disproven claims, and awful advice have the potential to steer the innocent in the wrong direction.

I'm not huffy at all; I'm dumbfounded at your extremely misplaced certainty. However, if you spew nonsense as fact (as is your wont), prepare to be called out on it. If you don't like that, stop posting ridiculousness.

IkesT · March 3, 2026 3:39PM

@mr1931S said:

@lermish said:

@mr1931S said:

@mr1931S said:
Am I invited to speak with Sheila? The three of us could have a discussion about Rockwells.
I'm suspicious about 2nd edition even existing as you are presenting it. We've all seen plenty of altered images here. My own experience is I've never managed to find a copy to buy of 1st or 2nd Harsche. That's all I have to say on this matter of Harsche editions preceding the 3rd.

I would add this:
I suspect that 2nd edition Harsche does not have section on 1909-S and 1909-S V.D.B. cents. I would be convinced of 2nd edition Harsche's existence if I could get one in my hands. It's a mystery at this point, far as I'm concerned. The 3rd edition, copyright 1964, is the first recognized-by-me published work on identifying obverse die varieties of 1909-S Lincoln cents so unless and until I'm proven wrong about this that's what we go with. If 2nd edition , copyright 1963, shows all those different obverses for 1909-S Lincoln cents, then we can credit Harsche with one year earlier than previously thought being first published, can't we?

We? Who is we? There is no we. You are alone on an island like a leper.

No one cares even a little bit other than giving you a hard time...which you have well and truly earned.

Leave yourself out of "we" then. I've got more support here than you might think. "We" is the silent majority. We don't know everything there is to know but we do know this: Going the route of participating in this forum's staggering buffoonery instigated by a few, a very few, is most undignified of you, huffy one.

FACT: Bert Harsche's 3rd edition of "Detecting Altered Coins" ©1964 is the first published work that attempts to identify the obverse die varieties of the 1909-S Lincoln cent.

Since Harsche's six, three more 1909-S obverses have been discovered. There are presently nine obverse die varieties now known to have been used to make 1909-S Lincoln cents both with and without V.D.B. I have been endeavoring to find additional ones which there most surely are. My Powerpoint Victor slideshow project has been helpful but is no substitute for coin-in-hand inspection.

I've got some exciting threads unrelated to 1909-S pennies coming up here for veterans and newbies alike to enjoy but ask that you not post in them if you can't control your propensity for huffiness. Change the channel if you don't like what it's showing is my recommendation for you.

Listen, as your business partner, I think we need to have a heart-to-heart. I'm afraid you're starting to alienate potential customers for our Harsche Kindling Papers. For 60 years, the public has relied on the superior kindling properties of First and Second Edition Harsche, but that resource has become depleted and the early editions are now nearly unavailable. Offering our Harsche Kindling Papers as a direct replacement for the superior early editions, sourced from the same original paper stock, is the entire underpinning of our marketing strategy. When you say that the First and Second Editions don't exist, you are saying that our product is a lie. The public knows that the Third Edition doesn't burn as well; if they think we've sourced Third Edition paper, we're sunk!

Our publicist, Janet, says you've created a PR nightmare for her and is threatening to quit. As you know, the Einstein family represents our single largest investor, and they are starting to get creeped out with your weird sig line quotes, such as this one:

Please just chill out and let our team do its thing. As Craig in accounting always says, "Relax, and let the money roll in!".

Creg · March 3, 2026 4:08PM

“then roll in the money and relax.”

mr1931S · March 3, 2026 4:18PM

@lermish said:

@mr1931S said:

@lermish said:

@mr1931S said:

@mr1931S said:
Am I invited to speak with Sheila? The three of us could have a discussion about Rockwells.
I'm suspicious about 2nd edition even existing as you are presenting it. We've all seen plenty of altered images here. My own experience is I've never managed to find a copy to buy of 1st or 2nd Harsche. That's all I have to say on this matter of Harsche editions preceding the 3rd.

I would add this:
I suspect that 2nd edition Harsche does not have section on 1909-S and 1909-S V.D.B. cents. I would be convinced of 2nd edition Harsche's existence if I could get one in my hands. It's a mystery at this point, far as I'm concerned. The 3rd edition, copyright 1964, is the first recognized-by-me published work on identifying obverse die varieties of 1909-S Lincoln cents so unless and until I'm proven wrong about this that's what we go with. If 2nd edition , copyright 1963, shows all those different obverses for 1909-S Lincoln cents, then we can credit Harsche with one year earlier than previously thought being first published, can't we?

We? Who is we? There is no we. You are alone on an island like a leper.

No one cares even a little bit other than giving you a hard time...which you have well and truly earned.

Leave yourself out of "we" then. I've got more support here than you might think. "We" is the silent majority. We don't know everything there is to know but we do know this: Going the route of participating in this forum's staggering buffoonery instigated by a few, a very few, is most undignified of you, huffy one.

FACT: Bert Harsche's 3rd edition of "Detecting Altered Coins" ©1964 is the first published work that attempts to identify the obverse die varieties of the 1909-S Lincoln cent.

Since Harsche's six, three more 1909-S obverses have been discovered. There are presently nine obverse die varieties now known to have been used to make 1909-S Lincoln cents both with and without V.D.B. I have been endeavoring to find additional ones which there most surely are. My Powerpoint Victor slideshow project has been helpful but is no substitute for coin-in-hand inspection.

I've got some exciting threads unrelated to 1909-S pennies coming up here for veterans and newbies alike to enjoy but ask that you not post in them if you can't control your propensity for huffiness. Change the channel if you don't like what it's showing is my recommendation for you.

The silent majority is smarter than me; they ignore your posts because your posts are nearly entirely absurd. They are not waiting with baited breath for your next round of misinformation.

FACT: Your nonsense, unsubstantiated/disproven claims, and awful advice have the potential to steer the innocent in the wrong direction.

I'm not huffy at all; I'm dumbfounded at your extremely misplaced certainty. However, if you spew nonsense as fact (as is your wont), prepare to be called out on it. If you don't like that, stop posting ridiculousness.

Why do you put so much effort into resisting learning something new? I try to learn something new every day. So should you.

Not me, not PCGS, not anyone participating in this forum published the first work on identifying 1909-S obverse die varieties. It was Bert Harsche and his team of numismatists that accomplished this. And you have the gall to call me ridiculous for sharing a historical fact like this here?

MFeld · March 3, 2026 4:26PM

@mr1931S said:

@lermish said:

@mr1931S said:

@lermish said:

@mr1931S said:

@mr1931S said:
Am I invited to speak with Sheila? The three of us could have a discussion about Rockwells.
I'm suspicious about 2nd edition even existing as you are presenting it. We've all seen plenty of altered images here. My own experience is I've never managed to find a copy to buy of 1st or 2nd Harsche. That's all I have to say on this matter of Harsche editions preceding the 3rd.

I would add this:
I suspect that 2nd edition Harsche does not have section on 1909-S and 1909-S V.D.B. cents. I would be convinced of 2nd edition Harsche's existence if I could get one in my hands. It's a mystery at this point, far as I'm concerned. The 3rd edition, copyright 1964, is the first recognized-by-me published work on identifying obverse die varieties of 1909-S Lincoln cents so unless and until I'm proven wrong about this that's what we go with. If 2nd edition , copyright 1963, shows all those different obverses for 1909-S Lincoln cents, then we can credit Harsche with one year earlier than previously thought being first published, can't we?

We? Who is we? There is no we. You are alone on an island like a leper.

No one cares even a little bit other than giving you a hard time...which you have well and truly earned.

Leave yourself out of "we" then. I've got more support here than you might think. "We" is the silent majority. We don't know everything there is to know but we do know this: Going the route of participating in this forum's staggering buffoonery instigated by a few, a very few, is most undignified of you, huffy one.

FACT: Bert Harsche's 3rd edition of "Detecting Altered Coins" ©1964 is the first published work that attempts to identify the obverse die varieties of the 1909-S Lincoln cent.

Since Harsche's six, three more 1909-S obverses have been discovered. There are presently nine obverse die varieties now known to have been used to make 1909-S Lincoln cents both with and without V.D.B. I have been endeavoring to find additional ones which there most surely are. My Powerpoint Victor slideshow project has been helpful but is no substitute for coin-in-hand inspection.

I've got some exciting threads unrelated to 1909-S pennies coming up here for veterans and newbies alike to enjoy but ask that you not post in them if you can't control your propensity for huffiness. Change the channel if you don't like what it's showing is my recommendation for you.

The silent majority is smarter than me; they ignore your posts because your posts are nearly entirely absurd. They are not waiting with baited breath for your next round of misinformation.

FACT: Your nonsense, unsubstantiated/disproven claims, and awful advice have the potential to steer the innocent in the wrong direction.

I'm not huffy at all; I'm dumbfounded at your extremely misplaced certainty. However, if you spew nonsense as fact (as is your wont), prepare to be called out on it. If you don't like that, stop posting ridiculousness.

Why do you put so much effort into resisting learning something new? I try to learn something new every day. So should you.

FACT: Bert Harsche's 3rd edition of "Detecting Altered Coins" ©1964 is the first published work that attempts to identify the obverse die varieties of the 1909-S Lincoln cent.

Not me, not PCGS, not anyone participating in this forum published the first work on identifying 1909-S obverse die varieties. It was Bert Harsche and his team of numismatists that accomplished this. And you have the gall to call me ridiculous for sharing a historical fact like this here?

This isn’t the thread for your continued discussion of other topics. Feel free to start a different thread, rather then continuing to derail this one.

1951 Dime!

Comments

Leave a Comment