Most underrated lincoln cent variety?

DCW · January 9, 2008 10:28PM

What do you think is the most underrated variety in the series in respect to rarity and price tag? This series is loaded with them. The 1968-D doubled die reverse is hard to come by and has some nice doubling on the memorial. The 1971 DDO business strike is almost ignored, but is worthy a place among specialists with its doubled liberty and date. I'm liking the 1995-D Doubled die obverse, too. Very rare and monster doubling on the motto, date, and all of the beard and hair features. Any thoughts?

cladking · January 10, 2008 12:46AM

It's a tough call with many contenders. I think the '99 wide AM will be a big winner long term.

pb2y · January 10, 2008 12:55AM

DCW
You will get opinions all over the map.
The coins you mention are error coins, not varieties.
http://www.coinworld.com/news/060605/bw_0606.asp

pharmer · January 10, 2008 1:09AM

<< DCW
You will get opinions all over the map.
The coins you mention are error coins, not varieties.
http://www.coinworld.com/news/060605/bw_0606.asp >>

"The coins you mention are error coins, not varieties."

Oh, brother.

DCW, you hit the nail on the head with the 1995-D 1c ddo, and I presume you mean ddo-3, the biggie. As dramatic as the infamous 1995, of which only several hundred thousand exist, and yet only a handful of the 1995-d are known.

DCW · January 10, 2008 1:37AM

<< DCW
You will get opinions all over the map.
The coins you mention are error coins, not varieties.
<a href="http://www.coinworld.com/news/060605/bw_0606.asp">http://www.coinworld.com/news/060605/bw_0606.asp</A> >>

Pby2, did you bother to read the article you gave a link to? The coins I mention are most definitely VARIETIES, coins that are produced from improperly prepared or offset hubbed dies producing the same exact "variety" several times. I would suggest you take another careful read.

pb2y · January 10, 2008 1:50AM

The US Mint had no intention of minting these coins.
Blunders they are and errors they remain.

Manorcourtman · January 10, 2008 2:02AM

1992-D Close AM is a real stopper if you collect the varieties. VERY rare.

thebeav · January 10, 2008 2:45AM

I kind of like the many types of 1972 DDO. With so many varieties, and great affordibility on most, I think there is quite a bit of room for appreciation on these. Some may consider Die 4 to be underrated. Whenever one appears they bring great money, but they are truly scarce. Perhaps Die 4 would get my vote.

oxy8890 · January 10, 2008 2:51AM

<< The US Mint had no intention of minting these coins.
Blunders they are and errors they remain. >>

What about die breaks, RPMs and OMMs? Where do they fall in your list of Varieties/Errors? You have a point but at the same time, your definition is one that would completely turn the VAM world as well as all of Numismatics upside down.

Suddenly, over dates, die clashes, OMMs. RPMs, die breaks, DDOs, DDRs, hot lips, spitting eagles, alligator eyes, double stars, double flowers, superbirds, missing letters, pitted surfaces, Scarfaces etc. etc. etc. are all errors because the mint never intended them to happen. Again a good point but the transition to your way of thinking should prove quite confusing to the Numismatic world.

Good Luck

pb2y · January 10, 2008 4:23AM

<< 

<< The US Mint had no intention of minting these coins.
Blunders they are and errors they remain.

>>

What about die breaks, RPMs and OMMs? Where do they fall in your list of Varieties/Errors? You have a point but at the same time, your definition is one that would completely turn the VAM world as well as all of Numismatics upside down. Suddenly, over dates, die clashes, OMMs. RPMs, die breaks, DDOs, DDRs, hot lips, spitting eagles, alligator eyes, double stars, double flowers, superbirds, missing letters, pitted surfaces, Scarfaces etc. etc. etc. are all errors because the mint never intended them to happen. Again a good point but the transition to your way of thinking should prove quite confusing to the Numismatic world. Good Luck >>

The confusion was already established by coin encyclopedias,
guides, reference books, album makers, ect. They mix words
like series, types, varieties and errors with no order and logic.
The Coin World link is not much help--terms like blundered dies
and error coins are not mentioned.
Many coins are mis-named as types or varieties and
error coins are the most numerous of coins mis-named.
It has been good for business, eh?

WaterSport · January 10, 2008 4:35AM

Well, I would hope those who routinely collect varieties could shed some opinions. As for me, I think some sorting out may occur as folks attempt to belly up to the variety set bar and see what they can find. I can also say, prices on common stuff, like 1938 S/S is already hitting stupid prices considering its availability. What will also happen is that while cents in general are climbing, and interest in varieties picks up, you can expect to pay more for ALL of them, regardless of condition or scarcity. Cherry picking will be your only financial relief.

WS

Coxe · January 10, 2008 4:38AM

Not sure if this would qualify as a variety for this post, but the '64 SMS. Otherwise, maybe the '71 DDO.

pharmer · January 10, 2008 5:04AM

<< Well, I would hope those who routinely collect varieties could shed some opinions. As for me, I think some sorting out may occur as folks attempt to belly up to the variety set bar and see what they can find. I can also say, prices on common stuff, like 1938 S/S is already hitting stupid prices considering its availability. What will also happen is that while cents in general are climbing, and interest in varieties picks up, you can expect to pay more for ALL of them, regardless of condition or scarcity. Cherry picking will be your only financial relief.

WS >>

Guess you saw those two last night on TT? One rpm-1, and 1 rpm-2, both ANACS ms65 red and "there for the grade", as what's his name would say. caca talk. Anyway, I thought about goign for them just to cross them, as PCGS correctly-slabbed varieties are seeing nice premiums, and it would have been any interesting test, as they both would go at least 65 red at PCGS. But the gamble is if they would get correctly labeled at PCGS, even though they are both fs'ers. That last is hurting them, and with this window of opportunity in the varieties slabbing field, they need to concentrate and get it right, bring more folks on board who know varieties.

ziggy29 · January 10, 2008 5:08AM

oops (+1) double post

ziggy29 · January 10, 2008 5:08AM

<< What about die breaks, RPMs and OMMs? Where do they fall in your list of Varieties/Errors? You have a point but at the same time, your definition is one that would completely turn the VAM world as well as all of Numismatics upside down. >>

IMO, any "blunder" or anomaly created repeatedly by a common die is a die variety. Anything relating to a malfunctioning of the coining process (whether in striking or planchet preparation) is an error. Somewhat oversimplified, but that's how I think of it.

Die breaks are a variety (or perhaps subvariety) of one particular die marriage (usually late die state). RPMs are a variety as well, as are overdates. These are the consistent results of using the same die pairing over and over again.

dorkkarl · January 10, 2008 5:16AM

<< What do you think is the most underrated variety in the series in respect to rarity and price tag? >>

hands down, the 1910-s vdb

K S

pharmer · January 10, 2008 6:21AM

"IMO, any "blunder" or anomaly created repeatedly by a common die is a die variety. Anything relating to a malfunctioning of the coining process (whether in striking or planchet preparation) is an error. Somewhat oversimplified, but that's how I think of it."

Excellent. Correct, and to the point.

cmerlo1 · January 10, 2008 6:23AM

<< "IMO, any "blunder" or anomaly created repeatedly by a common die is a die variety. Anything relating to a malfunctioning of the coining process (whether in striking or planchet preparation) is an error. Somewhat oversimplified, but that's how I think of it."

Excellent. Correct, and to the point. >>

cmerlo1 · January 10, 2008 6:24AM

1970-S DDO-1

High value now, but not as high as the '69 and not as well known...

JRocco · January 10, 2008 10:00AM

<< DCW
You will get opinions all over the map.
The coins you mention are error coins, not varieties.
<a href="http://www.coinworld.com/news/060605/bw_0606.asp">http://www.coinworld.com/news/060605/bw_0606.asp</A> >>

You don't consider the 1955 DDO a variety?

pb2y · January 10, 2008 10:13AM

<< "IMO, any "blunder" or anomaly created repeatedly by a common die is a die variety. Anything relating to a malfunctioning of the coining process (whether in striking or planchet preparation) is an error. Somewhat oversimplified, but that's how I think of it." Excellent. Correct, and to the point. >>

More sand in the eyes.

Cam40 · January 10, 2008 10:31AM

I got it. Proof-Like Zincolns
Someday these will be universally recognized varieties.

Cam40 · January 10, 2008 10:32AM

More sand in the eyes.

66RB · January 10, 2008 10:54AM

<< More sand in the eyes. >>

Eh, I think I'll listen to the guy who wrote a book about Lincolns, coppercoins

pb2y · January 10, 2008 11:27AM

<< 

<< More sand in the eyes. >>

Eh, I think I'll listen to the guy who wrote a book about Lincolns, coppercoins >>

He ain't coming close. Where is he in series, types,
varieties and blunder coins. Please don't be hoodwinked.
Tis a dealer thing and a bit warped in that favor.

pb2y · January 10, 2008 11:32AM

And you take a powder

mozeppa · January 10, 2008 11:36AM

cmerlo got it...1970-S ......DDO-001

66RB · January 10, 2008 11:42AM

<< 

<< 

<< More sand in the eyes. >>

Eh, I think I'll listen to the guy who wrote a book about Lincolns, coppercoins >>

He ain't coming close. Where is he in series, types,
varieties and blunder coins. Please don't be hoodwinked.
Tis a dealer thing and a bit warped in that favor.

And you take a powder >>

I'm sorry pb2y, I don't get it. If you read the thread I linked, you would know where he stands on type, varieties, die varieties, and 'blunder coins'. Maybe not the 'blunder' one

(what does that mean, in relation to Lincolns?)

So, when is your book coming out and where can I buy it?

Oh yeah, I like the 68-D DDR, I've been looking for one for quite a while now.

TwoSides2aCoin · January 10, 2008 11:48AM

I like that 1998 S Proof with the "CLOSE AM" & as previously mentioned:
'92 D CLOSE AM ... those are some toughies.

pb2y · January 10, 2008 11:59AM

Well did I read the thread, yes. The confusion mounts.
It is so much like others we have read. It says little
and further befuddles a few simple words.
Series, types, varieties and errors.
His BS is no help.

JRocco · January 10, 2008 12:30PM

<< Well did I read the thread, yes. The confusion mounts.
It is so much like others we have read. It says little
and further befuddles a few simple words.
Series, types, varieties and errors.
His BS is no help. >>

Can you please repeat this in a more.........ummm... understandable way?

seanq · January 10, 2008 12:46PM

<< 

<< Well did I read the thread, yes. The confusion mounts.
It is so much like others we have read. It says little
and further befuddles a few simple words.
Series, types, varieties and errors.
His BS is no help. >>

Can you please repeat this in a more.........ummm... understandable way? >>

Here, let me help:

"I have no idea what I'm saying, or reading, but I know I'm right."

To the OP's question, a few of my personal choices:

1919-D/D RPM#1
1919-S/S RPM#1
1946-S/D OMM#1
1980 DDO#1

I've looked for the 1919 RPMs forever, and I can't even find them already attributed. The 1946-S/D is something of an ugly step-sister to the 1944-D/S varieties, yet it's much more eye-catching than the '44-D/S #2 and much rarer than the '44-D/S #1. Finally, the 1980 DDO is just as appealing to me as the 1983 DDR and 1984 DDO#1, and much harder to find.

Lots of people have mentioned the wide and close AM varieties, I have to confess ignorance on many of the ones listed here. I wish someone would put together a illustrated little booklet on them, sinilar to what John Wexler did with the various 1995 doubled dies. I'd be first in line to buy one of those, and I bet it would go a long way toward getting those varieties the respect they deserve.

Sean Reynolds

centmaster · January 10, 2008 12:47PM

1928 Large S. It gets no respect and can be had for the price of a Small S, if you can find one.

seanq · January 10, 2008 12:56PM

<< 1928 Large S. It gets no respect and can be had for the price of a Small S, if you can find one. >>

Is the 1928 Large S really that hard to find? I used to have (and actually, still might) a recolored AU example, and I've seen enough others at shows that I've not felt the need to snap them up at every opportunity. In my head I associate that variety with the 1941 Large-S Nickel, whose rarity is also somewhat overstated (the CPG listed it as URS-5, 9-16 known; I've personally owned at least a dozen including one with an RPM and another with a doubled die reverse).

Sean Reynolds

Tyler1924S · January 10, 2008 12:58PM

<< 1928 Large S. It gets no respect and can be had for the price of a Small S, if you can find one. >>

Yes, this one gets my vote. As little as 4% are the large mintmark.

Large mintmark on right.

tahoe98 · January 11, 2008 4:24AM

<< 

<< 1928 Large S. It gets no respect and can be had for the price of a Small S, if you can find one. >>

Yes, this one gets my vote. As little as 4% are the large mintmark.

Large mintmark on right. >>

are you sure that is a large mintmark or just a small date

DCW · January 11, 2008 4:39AM

Somehow this thread got off topic and started to discuss the difference between error coins and varieties, something Pb2y's link clearly explained (in stark contrast to his own opinion.) For whatever reason, Pb2y is now throwing insults at Chuck from coppercoins and using big words in an attempt to mask his ignorance on the subject. Why not just read some literature and enjoy the hobby? Who knows? You might educate yourself in an area you never thought would interest you.

Most underrated lincoln cent variety?

Comments

Leave a Comment