Oldhoopster ✭✭✭✭✭
Reactions
-
Re: 1971 over 1951 year.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Saying I think the 9 might look like an old font, or some random marks might be a 5 is hardly proof. If you aren't a error expert, which your pr… (View Post)5 -
Re: I think I may need a 2nd set of eyes on these.. If disproving, please explain why.
@DieHardWithVengence To get back to your OP, it's awfully demanding of you to claim a possible new discovery then demand we PROVE YOU WRONG. You should be providing solid data on why you have so… (View Post)6 -
Re: Strange Kenmedy
The following site has lots of good information on doubled dies and characteristics. It's worth taking the tie to bookmark and study https://www.doubleddie.com/58222.html https://www.doubleddie.… (View Post)2 -
Re: I think I may need a 2nd set of eyes on these.. If disproving, please explain why.
@DieHardWithVengence You should be aware by know that there are a number of members with backgrounds in metalurgy, analytical chemistry, materials science as well as former TPG graders, and top end d… (View Post)6 -
Re: I think I may need a 2nd set of eyes on these.. If disproving, please explain why.
The following sites provide characteristics of true doubling as well as the characteristics of worthless doubling such as mechanical and die deterioration. Spend some time studying these characterist… (View Post)1
