| Author |
Message |
 RhubarbSenior Member
Posts: 856
Joined: 24 Jan 2007
Location: West Georgia
|
|
 Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2007 11:16 pm |
 |
|
ED, What's the price guide on a Ramp? That's a different category.
David
_________________
There is no shame in not knowing; the shame lies in not finding
out.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 StevenExpert Member
Posts: 1298
Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Location: S/E Missouri
|
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2007 11:20 pm |
|
|
To quote Ed.
| Quote: |
Class 1 is rotated hub doubling
(die rotated between hubbings making doubling)
Class 2 is distorted hub doubling
(the hub used was in a different condition from one hubbing to another or a totaly different hub so if it was older the older hubs image may be pushed out further toward the rim than the newer hubs image so you see spread to the rim)
Class 3 is design hub doubling
(in some years they had 2 designs like 1970-S large and small date or 1960 large and small so if one hub was different in design you get both different designs)
Class 4 is offset hub doubling
(this would be where the die shifted between hubbings not rotated, maybe up-down-side so you see 2 images shifted not only rotated.)
Class 5 is pivoted hub doubling
(like class one but it rotated on a pivot point other than the center, you might see doubling strong far from the pivot point but not much at the pivot point.)
Class 6 is distended hub doubling
(these are ones where the letters are fat, it might be that the die was treated in some way thermaly maybe causing expansion so when hubbed over another image it just looks fat. I'm not sure this is the only reason for this class, some seem to bend making the letters like the spines of letters look bent so there must be more to it than expansion.)
Class 7 modified hub doubling
(I'm just guessing this one, maybe they changed something like the large to small date or date position and ground away one date then made a modified one so you see a trace of the other... I don't see why it would be called doubled since it's modified and to me it looks like they did it on the masters on most of them... maybe they mean modified with a trace of the initial image still there maybe someone can explain what step it was done at. The only thing that would be doubled is if they used one hub with the date mostly removed then a second with it in a new location but why use the the partial one is ? to me. Look at 1970-D for some examples of this)
Class 8 tilted hub doubling
(maybe the first hubbing is not flat so maybe it just presses in one area, on some the L of liberty or IN of motto then they hubbed it again flat. I think in most cases the second image will hide the first but if combined with another class you might see the tilted partial image then rotated or shifted by the other classes the second image. Maybe the tilted ones can only be seen on coins that also had another class of shift/doubling)
Class 9 single squeeze doubling, is there a better name?
(the doubling we see on the modern ones made with "single squeeze", probably the reason the CPG said the 97 DDO earlobe was not a DDO is at the time this type of doubling was not known but it is now. It seems to be the die shifting durring single squeeze but is not well understood, it could even be that they sqeezed more than once. Most of the time it will cause notching and or widening but not real sep of images)
Some or many ddo's are a combination of classes, I'd think all class 8 must also have another class and like I said I've never heard of a real class 7 and don't understand why they number it at all. For me just being able to see the non real ddo's is the key to finding the real ones regardless of truly understanding what class they might be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RhubarbSenior Member
Posts: 856
Joined: 24 Jan 2007
Location: West Georgia
|
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2007 11:27 pm |
|
|
So I am to assume that this is a Pretty good Coin?
Steven and Ed. It started out as a question of the Day. Now you too(since it's 1:27 am) have made my day.
Thank you.
David
_________________
There is no shame in not knowing; the shame lies in not finding
out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
StevenExpert Member
Posts: 1298
Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Location: S/E Missouri
|
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2007 11:35 pm |
|
|
Well,
As far as a keeper, yes. I just looked through mine and I don't have that one yet. 
Nice find.
Steven
|
|
|
|
|
|
 eagamesExpert Member
Posts: 3013
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
|
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2007 11:36 pm |
|
|
On the site it says $15 in EF and $90 in ms65.
The only book I've seen that 34-d listed in Wexlers old book (maybe 1984?) at $15 in BU but prices are sure up since then LOL.
_________________
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
|
RhubarbSenior Member
Posts: 856
Joined: 24 Jan 2007
Location: West Georgia
|
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2007 11:40 pm |
|
|
What can I say now. You guy's are the best! Now back to the coin's.
Thank's again guy's. Man that was exciting.
David
_________________
There is no shame in not knowing; the shame lies in not finding
out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
StevenExpert Member
Posts: 1298
Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Location: S/E Missouri
|
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2007 11:41 pm |
|
|
I can't see the entire example you have here but I would say $5.00 range.
Steven
|
|
|
|
|
|
RhubarbSenior Member
Posts: 856
Joined: 24 Jan 2007
Location: West Georgia
|
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2007 11:43 pm |
|
|
Steven, Ed,
It's a keeper!
David
_________________
There is no shame in not knowing; the shame lies in not finding
out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
 DickExpert Member
Posts: 5780
Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Location: Rialto, CA.
|
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2007 12:26 am |
|
|
Steven, I was reading your comments on the "class 7", and got to thinking: Is it possible that, that class refers to the small changes that have been made to the cameo, over the years? I refer you to the current size of Abe's head, as iopposed to how it was several years ago. Notice the distance from the lower rim, now, and how close it was on the wheats. The VDB has been moved from the angle facing the rim, and now it sits on the point of the shoulder. Obviously, it is NOT an error, but it is definitely a modification. The first date that could legally fall into the modification area, (1909) is when they removed the VDB from the reverse. Later, (1918) it was added, but "discretely" placed on the OBV. None of these "changes" fall into the category of a "hub doubling", so what does the "Modified" actually refer to? I have a note that refers to 1963, but what does it point out?
Dick
_________________
" Deja Moo: The feeling that you've heard this bull before".
|
|
|
|
|
|
StevenExpert Member
Posts: 1298
Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Location: S/E Missouri
|
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2007 7:20 am |
|
|
Dick I would not at this time be able to explain. I qouted a previous post by Ed on this. I am still studying the information. The quote was used in this thread due to the question by David concerning rotation and class 6 DDO's. I still have to refer back to some of the explainations to try and make a determination from time to time. 
Steven
|
|
|
|
|
|
eagamesExpert Member
Posts: 3013
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
|
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2007 11:22 am |
|
|
Dick,
These class 7s are confusing. I once thought it meant things where they had 2 types of designs like a large and small date and made a DDO by using one over the other but it's not that and you will see those are not listed as class 7. The ones that are class 7 look like they used a hub with modification and remnants of what was changed create the double die. Look at 1970-D listings on the site and you can see how they moved the 7 position but left remnants of it. I don't know what step they make those changes, the name modified hub says they did it to the hub but I don't see how anyone could remove anything and then replace it on the hub. It would make more sense if they did it (maybe to the galvano?) before making the hub.
One possible thought I have is: they have existing hubs then decide to move the 7 and some new hubs are made with the new position 7. Instead of throwing out the ones with the wrong position they grind the 7 off and there's no way to replace it (easier to grind off than to replace). Then they use them for one hubbing with that design element ground off and for the next hubbing they use the new hub with it in the new position. The result is some remnant of the ground off 7 from one hubbing and the new position 7 from the other hubbing. This is my wild guess at explaining them. 
Maybe someone knows a better explanation or what step it's done at and can chime in with an answer.
_________________
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
|
 coopExpert Member
Posts: 3402
Joined: 17 Sep 2003
Location: Arizona
|
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2007 12:40 pm |
|
|
Ed: I too am at a loss to explain the 1970 DDO. If they modified the hub, many dies would have the DDO. And if they modified the die, then only one die would be affected. Because the listing of DDO is for a single die, I'm not sure how it would have happened. But think it must have been a High 7 and a low seven. I've seen the die marks removed from under the 70. So I don't know for sure what happened?
_________________
Richard S. Cooper
You may be only one person in the world, but you may also be the world to one person.
|
|
|
|
|
|
DickExpert Member
Posts: 5780
Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Location: Rialto, CA.
|
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2007 1:21 pm |
|
|
Gentlemen, Looks like I'll have to give my '70's another look!
This must be the reason for having made provision for the "Class 7". I thought of the '60s, small over large, large over small, and decided it didn't apply. Knowing that the Philly mint has needed hubs, and knowing it is practical to grind off the mm to make a "P", they also evidently considered the idea of "moving the "7", as well. Is there any evidence that the high 7, or the low 7 was only minted in one mint?
The short bar, seen on those involved, does look to be in the "high 7" position. But the question, "Why bother?", comes to mind. Wasn't the "Class 7" already written, BEFORE the '70 incident? Gotta be something else.
Dick
_________________
" Deja Moo: The feeling that you've heard this bull before".
|
|
|
|
|
|
eagamesExpert Member
Posts: 3013
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
|
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2007 5:05 pm |
|
|
Interesting point Dick about what class 7 exists before 1970!
I can't explain why these would be different than some other weird DDOs like ones with a weak digit showing on the date (ones people like to call repunched dates even though date's are not punched in these years)
On the site search you can pick select by DDO class. I did it with class 7 and it only lists 6 and all of them are 70-D.
Let's hope somebody that knows more about class 7 can answer these.
_________________
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
|
eagamesExpert Member
Posts: 3013
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
|
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2007 9:11 pm |
|
|
Just reading the CPG...
It sounds like what I said above is the reason on the 70-d cents...
They had existing hubs then decided to move the 7 and some new hubs were made with the new position 7. Instead of throwing out the ones with the wrong position they ground the wrong position 7 off. Then they used them for one hubbing with the 7 ground off but it still had a remnant showing and for the next hubbing they used the new hub with it in the new position. The result is some remnant of the ground off 7 from one hubbing and the new position 7 from the other hubbing. It probably only was done that way making a few working die and the others were made using complete hubs.
According to the CPG the same thing caused the 1958 over 7 cents so that would mean they re-used some 57 hubs with the 7 mostly removed then did a second hubbing with a new 58 hub. Maybe this was done because they wanted to get more use out of the hubs.
Sounds reasonable to me especialy for the 70-d cents.
_________________
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
