Can a Proof Double die Coin be minted after 1997 ?

dlimb2 · December 20, 2003 4:59PM

If they are struck more than once..and one of the stirkes is the slightest off center or the die is tilted...I believe a double die can occur...The reason I say this is because the Mint missed one...My coin was struck with one of the stirkes either tilted or shifted because it cut into the rim...and the spread is distributed evenly around the coin...I know they are saying it can not be done but if a coin is struck more than once...I beg to differ. I believe in time they are going to have to change their thinking that a double die can no longer occur. Because I do not belive in some of the fairy tales I have heard regarding double dies...maybe you will not find a double die on an uncerculated coin because it is only struck once...but on coins struck multiple times they are going to have to rethink their strategy.

richbeat · December 20, 2003 5:27PM

It does not matter whether a planchet is struck once, or more than once. Doubled dies do not occur that way. This is a common misunderstanding in the hobby. Doubled dies occur in the die making process, not when the planchets are struck. Machine doubling (strike doubling) occurs during the striking process. That is most likely what you have. Even though dies are made by the single squeeze process now, there is an extremely slim possibility (apparently) that a doubled die could still occur. Hope this helps.

cladking · December 21, 2003 12:28AM

It is possible for a coin to be struck with a die loose.

It should be possible for a proof die to move between strikes. I've never seen one though.

JRocco · December 21, 2003 1:29AM

This is close to another thread on the boards. Here is an example of machine doubling(during the striking process) on a 2002 Indiana proof quarter.

FrattLaw · December 21, 2003 6:17AM

Buy the Cherrypicker's Guide Vol I. There is an excellent discussion as to the differences between double die and machine (strike) doubling. Richbeat's explanation is right on though.

Michael

dlimb2 · December 21, 2003 6:26AM

Fratt, I have read all that but my coin does not fit that description....look at the pics on my other thread...2001 DDO...Thank You.

LUCKOFTHEIRISH · December 21, 2003 8:10AM

What tyically happens to proof dies is the chrome wears aways from the base metal it is bonded to after many uses. The base metal where the chrome used to be is now exposed, and the base metal wears away quicker than the surrouning chrome that still exists. The visual effect is doubling.

dlimb2 · December 21, 2003 8:15AM

LUCKOFTHEIRISH, would that then be considered a bouble die?

dlimb2 · December 21, 2003 8:15AM

I guess die fatigue.

LUCKOFTHEIRISH · December 21, 2003 8:22AM

I think it is Die Deterioration. Here Is a neat article: Scroll down to to read about proof double dies.

http://conecaonline.org/content/recentfinds.htm

dlimb2 · December 21, 2003 8:26AM

FrattLaw, what I am saying is that the Cherrypickers guide that I have has Double Dies and Machine doubling prior to 1997 and the change of the minting process...this coin that I have that is in inquestion is a 1998 Kennedy...I would have to say if I were to follow the Cherrypickers guide and what is happening on the coin, It would have to be a double die....but they are telling me no way...and I say they are wrong.

dlimb2 · December 21, 2003 8:30AM

Luck if it were die deterioration it would have a spread on both sides of the letters.

LUCKOFTHEIRISH · December 21, 2003 8:32AM

Depends on how thick the chrome layer deposit is in those areas.

dlimb2 · December 21, 2003 8:36AM

Lucky look at the pictures on my other thread they are of the coin.

LUCKOFTHEIRISH · December 21, 2003 8:46AM

What's the name of the other thread?

dlimb2 · December 21, 2003 8:47AM

2001 DDO

LUCKOFTHEIRISH · December 21, 2003 8:51AM

Looks identical to the article from Coneca. It still should not happen to proof coins. Someone dropped the ball again at the mint. They are proof coins, and they sould not make it out because they are inspected twice before leaving.

dlimb2 · December 21, 2003 8:53AM

Lucky I know...this is the 1998 Matte Proof.

LUCKOFTHEIRISH · December 21, 2003 8:58AM

Send it in to be graded. See what it comes back as. I don't know if they will give it some sort of designation.

dlimb2 · December 21, 2003 9:01AM

I had it graded Lucky, they didnt know what to designate it as...because it was not in the books...they told me that the mint had changed the way they minted coins and what was in the books would not apply.

LUCKOFTHEIRISH · December 21, 2003 9:03AM

What did it come back as?

dlimb2 · December 21, 2003 9:04AM

MS69 specimen

LUCKOFTHEIRISH · December 21, 2003 9:05AM

Did they body bag it?

dlimb2 · December 21, 2003 9:07AM

No, why would they do that...came right out of the set...it has not been cleaned or touched by human hands...it was only touched when they graded it...and it is still as they cased it.

LUCKOFTHEIRISH · December 21, 2003 9:18AM

Sorry I looked at the wrong page. Looks like some new type of error has been discovered. It should get recognition since it is a proof and should not occur. Now the problem is how does one go about doing this.

dlimb2 · December 21, 2003 9:21AM

Lucy, you figure that one out and let me know...My dealer that I used to sent it to the grading service said do not put it with my other coins...He said it was a double die...and so have several other dealers in the Chicago area...and said they will have to eventually call it something.

LUCKOFTHEIRISH · December 21, 2003 9:24AM

How did it get a MS 69 when it is a proof coin?

dlimb2 · December 21, 2003 9:26AM

Thats the way they are grading them...NGC and PCGS both designate it MS. Though it is called a Matte Proof and is from the !998 Kennedy Commeorative set.

richbeat · December 21, 2003 9:29AM

I looked at the photos and I'm not sure what you have. In some of the photos it looks like a doubled die, some like machine doubling and on the photo of the 1 it almost looks like Longacre doubling. Very interesting.

LUCKOFTHEIRISH · December 21, 2003 9:33AM

Perhaps, they used a die that that they forgot to chrome???? It would then have a MS surface.

LUCKOFTHEIRISH · December 21, 2003 9:40AM

Send a picture to: KPotter256@aol.com

He is interested in such coins. He works at Coneca. Perhaps, he can tell you what you have????

dlimb2 · December 21, 2003 9:41AM

richbeat, It has the letters and numbers sitting right on each other...and the bottom one is not flattened out...I have taken a look at it with a 30x mag......I dont know what it is but it has everything happening...I will just be glad when another one shows up like it so I can give it a name and take a break...becasue it is a special coin...and like you said it has it all...but it does not have the longacre...that one is missing.

dlimb2 · December 21, 2003 9:44AM

Lucky I have talked to Ken Potter...this coin has to be in someones hands in order for them to grab the full jest of it...for pictures can not describe it...I will not risk putting it into the mail...I think one day I will meet with Ken Potter and just see what he thinks it really is. Or wait until someone else has theirs designated.

LUCKOFTHEIRISH · December 21, 2003 9:51AM

To let you know I sent a proof error to him via mail it came back no problem. Make sure you insure it.

richbeat · December 21, 2003 9:53AM

dlimb2:

I understand what you're saying. That's what makes it interesting. If conder sees this maybe he'll chime in and know what it is. His knowledge is impeccable.

dlimb2 · December 21, 2003 9:55AM

Lucky if it was anything other than a 1998 Matte I would. I have another one like it but it is perfect and there is no comparing the two...I can get another perfect one but not another messed up one.

dlimb2 · December 21, 2003 10:00AM

richbeat, I would appreciate it, if he would....it is defenitly a problem child.

richbeat · December 21, 2003 10:05AM

Apparently the half dollar dies were NOT being single squeezed in 1998. Both the Philadelphia and Denver mints were experiencing problems with trying to use the single squeeze method on half dollar dies (all the other denominations WERE being single squeezed.) It was not until 1999 that the two mints begin to use the single squeeze on half dollar dies. That means there could very well be doubled dies for 1998 halves.

dlimb2 · December 21, 2003 10:09AM

richbeat, I know I read that too...I have looked everywhere regarding this and I read the same thing...but I can not get anyone to say that it was possible. All I get is it can not be done...but they are going to find out they are going to have to change their thinking.

richbeat · December 21, 2003 10:21AM

Like you said earlier, I don't think you're going to know exactly what you have until someone like Ken Potter can actually physically look at it. It sounds promising. Good luck!

dlimb2 · December 21, 2003 10:24AM

Richbeat, Thank You very much for your time...and appreciate your help.

mozeppa · December 21, 2003 10:30AM

billy crawford has discovered a 2000 or a 2001 lincoln cent that is believed to be a doubled die....c.d. from copper coins agrees with him...

yet its not supposed to be possible...then again....why not a proof as well?

if history has proved one thing .....the mint has done some strange stuff!.............................and then denied it!

LUCKOFTHEIRISH · December 21, 2003 10:43AM

Send it back for regrading along with that Coneca article. They may designate it then.

LUCKOFTHEIRISH · December 21, 2003 10:46AM

It also sounds like it may have been struck with unpolished proof dies like the 1999 W 5 & 10 dollar gold piece. They also give them a MS designation.

richbeat · December 21, 2003 10:59AM

"yet it's not supposed to be possible"

The reference books will not say that it's impossible for a doubled die to occur using the single squeeze method; they say "virtually impossible" and "highly unlikely." Apparently it's still possible (re: 2001 cent) but the chances are extremely slim to almost none.

dlimb2 · December 21, 2003 12:50PM

Could be Lucky, I dont know.

Conder101 · December 21, 2003 5:16PM

I replied in the other thread but as I said there I would have to see the coin in person. The doubling doesn't look flat in the pictures but I really can't tell. Images, being two dimensional, can be deceiving when you are needing to be able to see depth for the determination of flat or rounded on the secondary impression. (To me the B appears rounded, but the 1 appears flat.) However, with as much displacement as the images are showing, I am not seeing the splittling of the serifs that should be there if it was a doubled die. Until I had the chance to examine the coin I would lean toward MDD.

As for the MS designation, the Matte 1998 Kennedy caused confusion because at the time the term Matte was always used in regards to US coins in reference to the Matte Proofs of the early 20th century. Also the Kennedy was extremely well struck up with squared rims like a proof. But the Mint did not call it a proof, in fact they called it Uncirculated. Also it has the exact same finish as is found on the Uncirculated Commemorative dollar coins. The services have called it different things. Matte Proof, Mint State, Matte unc, and Specimen. (And I think some of the firms have changed their disignations over time) In the case of this one it has been called a Specimen Mint State 69.

dlimb2 · December 22, 2003 1:22AM

Conder101, here is a picture of the E...these were very hard to take.

Conder101 · December 22, 2003 5:00AM

Ok now THAT photo is convincing!!

I'm sold, it's a doubled die. The arms of the E show clear splitting all the way to the field, from all three angles.

dlimb2 · December 22, 2003 5:38AM

Conder101, Thanks I agree...I dont think there are serrifs like there were on the old coins....this is where the new minting proscess is different...I still believe they are going to have to call these double dies wheather they want to or not. They will at least have to call them somehting. I think they will be collectable too...I am going to wait until they finally decide on what they are going to call them and then resubmit.

seanq · December 22, 2003 5:38AM

Devil's advocate here - why would the doubling show on the two cross-bars on the front of the letter, but not on the serif on the upper back side of the letter?

I also admit the photos are pretty convincing, but I'm not ready to proclaim it a DDO quite yet. I'll go find the other pics and try to chime in again.

Edit: Went and looked at the other pics. It does not look like a traditional 'doubled die' in any of the other pics you posted. I have seen examples of reduction lathe doubling (on tokens or medals, never on a U.S. coin) which look remarkably similar to your coin, but I'm not ready to make that call. Seeing every piece of the puzzle individually, and not being intimately familiar with Kennedies, I'm wondering if the doubling on all of the elements is in the same direction - either rotationally (all counter-clockwise) or in a straight line (all toward 12:00)? If the doubling is in random directions, that makes a stronger case for MDD or abrasion doubling.

I will agree with one thing others have said - that is one interesting coin you have there.

Sean Reynolds

Can a Proof Double die Coin be minted after 1997 ?

Comments

Leave a Comment