Does anyone else consider the chances??

coppercoins · May 21, 2005 12:48PM

Something that has always intrigued me is the possibility (and likelihood) that some of the doubled die reverse coins we know of from two consecutive years could actually be the same die? Mint reports show that a number of reverse dies were "held over" from one year to the next, but I have yet to see anything supporting evidence that two coins struck from the same reverse die bear consecutive dates. Okay, so I a bit biased and uneducated in the earlier coins, I am sure there are probably well documented cases in 19th century coins, but since I am a Lincoln cent aficionado, that's my main consideration in this writing.

I wonder sometimes if a contest of sorts would help bring out a pair of culprit coins from two different dates that show the exact same distinguishing die markers on the reverse? Unfortunately because I spend far too much time studying them and not selling them, I don't have a huge reward to offer, espeically considering the time it would take to find such coins. I myself would require a handsome reward to spend the time it would take to find this for someone else...I'm doing it for my own sake. Just for sanity sake. I KNOW there have to be examples out there, but it's likely the two culprit coins would likely appear completely normal and innocent, save a single die scratch telling of their "held over" story.

Okay, I'm finished rambling.

JRocco · May 21, 2005 12:52PM

Interesting challenge C.D. I wonder if it could be proven. I will check thru my DDR's to see if there are any die markers that jump out.

MrHalfDime · May 21, 2005 1:04PM

CD:

Your suspicions are correct for the nineteenth century coins. In the Capped Bust half dime series, not only were specific reverse dies used in several different years, but it is well documented that even dated obverse dies were used in several different years. At the start of each coin press run, a die pair was selected from the vault for that production run, and little care was taken to see that the obverse die had the current year. Dies were an expensive commodity, and if there was even a little life left in a die, it was put to use to produce coins. In "The Federal Half Dimes 1792 - 1837", we constructed an emission sequence chart that details the use of each specific die, both obverse and reverse, showing when each die was used. It is not unusual to see a die used for two, three and even four different years in the production of half dimes. I must assume that the same practices were used for the larger denominations, as well.

coppercoins · May 21, 2005 1:55PM

Very interesting Mr. Half Dime, and I was sure that was the case, but did not know for certain since my backward study of coins basically ends at 1909. My needle is the same, but the haystack is a thousand times greater in size. I've been looking for years to find a mismatched 1972-1973-1974 reverse to obverse coin so I could find its mated reverse in normal coinage, and I have kept coins with obvious reverse markers in hopes of finding a mate in a different year - still no luck.

And now with the renewal of interest in the reverses of the memorial cent with the "close AM" and "wide AM" varieties, I may just get my answer as to whether dies are used in consecutive years. I figure at least one of the dies used in one of the three most common years where this occurs is the same die...now I need the proof.

cladking · May 21, 2005 2:08PM

Proving it with moderns is doubly challenging. There were so many dies used!!

Incredibly in some cases there are no surviving examples of as many as half these
dies in unc or higher circulated grades! While die differences of varieties can be just
as dramatic as earlier coins, most dies will be nearly identical and striking character-
istics will frequently mask identifying specific dies. This will be further complicated by
wear on most of the subject coins.

I'm aware of no moderns which are reported by the mint to be struck on anything ot-
her than new current dies but have not closely read all the reports. Most of the quar-
ters struck with old reverse dies were in the mid '70's but I always imagined these were
made in error or they neglected to change the reverse die when the new obverse die
was installed.

Many of the modern varieties are struck by a single die pair which will further increase
the difficulty of finding a match. I have to research a couple of these for another board
member, I'll keep an eye open for a match but success is unlikely.

I've long been a proponent of saving the best example of each die when looking at bags
so it's not impossible that such matches can be found.

DMWJR · May 21, 2005 3:57PM

This occurred with large cents, half cents, and Morgan Dollars also.

MrHalfDime · May 21, 2005 11:49PM

CD:

Much as your study of coins has been focused on the moderns, my own knowledge base is strictly of the Bust and Seated coins, so I may not be of much help to you in your study, except to offer a bit of encouragement (or perhaps discouragement). CladKing correctly pointed out the biggest challenge to identifying individual dies for modern coins. It is relatively easy to identify individual dies for the Bust series, because, try as they might to make all of the dies identical, only the central device (bust or eagle) was part of a device punch; everything else was punched into the working dies by hand. All of the stars, numerals, and letters of the legend were punched into the dies, one at a time. Even the steadiest hand would produce minor differences that we can easily detect today.

A very good friend of mine, Douglas Hill, began several years ago to identify individual die pairs for the Indian Cent series, and actually published two books in what he intended as a complete series of books on the Indian Cents. By the time the Indian Cents were produced, the hubbing process was being used to produce working dies, with all but the date and mint mark (if any) as part of the hub. This made identification of individual dies all but impossible. Doug closely studied the individual dies, and used 'lapping lines' to identify indivudual dies. Lapping lines occur when the coiner 'laps' the die to abrade any anomolies, such as clash marks, minor die cracks, etc. Lapping is an abrasive process, much like polishing, and leaves tiny 'hairlines' on the die, which show up as raised lines on the coins struck from those dies. Unfortunately, Doug's work was abandoned, as few saw the value in die marriage collecting of Indian Cents - short sighted thinking on the part of a few. But I digress. For the present day coins, I would think that identification of individual dies would be even more difficult, but do not let that stop you.

I'm not sure if official Mint records would even record which specific dies or die pairs were used to produce coins, or if you would have access to those records. Perhaps your best bet would be to use a similar process to what Doug Hill used, to identify individual dies from the evidence left on the coins they struck.

Does anyone else consider the chances??

Comments

Leave a Comment