2005 P 1c SMS DDR (a better one this time)

[Russellhome]

I found a minor 2005 P SMS (Satin Finish) DDR that I posted earlier. I found another one - and I think this one is a little better -- perhaps even listable here at Coppercoins.

A portion of Column 7 is doubled well to the left - near the left leg of Mr. Lincoln.





Billy Crawford listed this one as 2005 P 1c SMS CDDR-022

[Bob P]

That one fits the criteria for listing it here Ken. Looks like old ABe's got a cane!

[coppercoins]

My personal opinion - a die gouge.

[wavysteps2003]

Since the bar has a curved appearance and is also not symmeterical, I would tend to agree with Chuck's opinion of it being a die gouge / scratch. It just does not look like the typical doubled column that we have been seeing.

Bill S., what do you think?

WAVYSTEPS2003 aka BJ Neff

[Russellhome]

[coppercoins]

Actually I see the linked image as a die gouge too. No evidence at all that it's hub doubling. I think some people are losing sight of attributing what can be substantiated and are attributing anything and everything that shows a stray mark or two.

I don't mean to knock what you found nor what Ken photographed - in my opinion they are die gouges, and I don't see how they could be proven to be doubled dies. Without substantiating them to be so, where's the point? I collect doubled dies because the doubling is interesting. If I can't tell exactly what the doubling is, then is it really doubling or a tool mark?

[Russellhome]

Point taken. It would seem reasonable that in the present flurry of die variety finds, that attributors would be tighter - and perhaps even raise the bar a bit for what is considered a listable variety. And if it cannot be decerned as being hub doubling or something else, then better to error on the conservative side (and not list it). It appears the opposite has happened. Some of those attributed MN quarter DDRs are marginal at best. I actually have a MN D SMS Die #4 and the doubling is nothing more than a tiny fleck of metal and could easily have been caused by tooling or the smallest of die chips. IMO - listing such marginal junk is counterproductive and diminishes interest the more substantial finds.

As far as this cent find goes -- I am no expert. And the Satin Finish on the coin makes the task even harder as it obscures any crisp detail that might give a clue to what caused it. I felt it was significant enough -- provided it was hub doubling -- to have listed. It got listed, but I conceed that its status as a DDR is debateable.

[wavysteps2003]

It is interesting that you mention the quarter DDRs and I am sure that some are very minor and not worth listing, HOWEVER, and that is a big however, the numismatic eyes are looking upon these varieties with increasing interest and trying to buy them as rapidly as they become known. The "SHARK FEEDING FRENZY" best describes what is happening. This did not happen with the Lincoln cent and thus we are favored with a longer look at what is listable and what is not, with the idea of making money not looming over us.

WAVYSTEPS2003 aka BJ Neff

[coop]

The feeding frenzy drives prices up and what do thay have to show in a couple of years? A coin they may have paid too much for. Wisconsin-D quarters is a great example of that.

[Russellhome]

I updated the image on this variety, this time with my new camera. It appears to be a thick flat bar. The 'Cane' look is what is left of the chair arm just outside the bar.

[wavysteps2003]

Even with the new picture, my opinion has not fluctuated and in fact seems to strenghten the concept that this is not a doubling of the column, but some other type of die damage. With all the other doubled columns, the secondary image seems raised and slightly rounded similar to the coulumn form. Since this anomaly is flat and also has an irregular leading edge, I would rule it out as a doubling of the column or in fact any of the surrounding design elements.

BJ Neff

I should add that the picture alluded to of Potter's doubled die Lincoln cent reverse has a good fit for a possible secondary right leg.

[Dick]

I tend to agree with the majority. The (bar?) is too non-symetrical for a doubled die. The gouge does fit more realisitally. IMHO.
Dixck

[coop]

Interesting side point. The left arm of Lincoln's chair is in that same location as the rough mark. The die could of had debris there and thus the gouge trying to remove it?

[Dick]

I got another look at the last photo, and this is what I have observed:
There IS slight doubling on the legs.
The cane does appear to be a gouge.
There is a weak bar, abouit the same size as the statue is tall.
There IS doubling on the left arm, and shoulder.
There appears to be an extra leg, with doubling, next to the column 6.
Or do I have an over-active imasgination?
Dick

[Russellhome]

I know what a 'typical' doubled column looks like. But I also know that some whacky things happened in 2005 -- particularly when you examine the various versions of the OIV 5c DDRs. Some are deep, some are shallow. Some are huge offsets and some are minor. And a few have a slight twist with the offset. So given what can happen, I guess I don't understand why this would not be a possibility for this 1c variety...



In my example. I copied, moved, and slightly rotated the highest portion of column 7 into the position it might have been to make the initial kiss. Given the sligtly concurve nature of the hub (or die, I can't remember which) -- the first impression would be at the center of the coin. If after only a slight 'kiss', the hub and die snapped into proper allignment, as the hubbing proccess continued, Lincoln's hand and the pedistal base may have sank deep enough to obscure some of the initial doubling -- leaving the look of a 'cane' and a minor, flat bar. Of course, this is speculation on my part - but it seems as plausable as a die gouge to me.

And Dick - I do think you have an over-active imagination. But that's OK. With so much discussion about such a minor anomaly - a wild imagination keeps things interesting and fun.