Am I looking too hard?

[Rhubarb]

I have a worn but defined 1972 D coin that I can't match with the site. It appears that there is doubling in the Motto. Perhap's I am looking too hard. Thank's.

[Steven]

Looks like the 1972D 1DO-002 to me.

[KurtS]

Nice find! I suspected a DDO when I saw the inner curl of the 9 in the date. I should look closer at 72-D Lincolns.

[Bob P]

I agree that it is most likely 1972D-1DO-002. A lot of folks don't realize the D mint has at least 3 very nice doubled dies for the date. Congrats on your find.

[Teryble]

Congrats! I'm ashamed to say I am still unable to distinguish the difference of the die wear on my 1919 to this example. They appear to have the same characteristics,......What is my untrained eye missing? I see a double s in "pluribus" that does not appear to be shelflike & does appear doubled. I guess what I'm asking is (clue me in) what exactly shows the difference, between die wear & DD?
MAXI

[coppercoins]

Teryble - both coins are worn which makes it a little more difficult to discern and describe.

First, the 1972D cent has extra body and thickness to the letters which is evident in the photos. That's the first sign that it's a doubled die.

Your coin has the normal features plus a "smear" in one direction. I'll give you that it is odd and not nrmally seen, but it is a simple case of die wear. Here's how I know:

1. The 'doubling' is not the same shape as the letters. It's drawn out differently in different areas.

2. There are lines leading through the 'doubling', which always signify steel molecule movement...die wear.

3. The spread, direction of spread, and strength of spread as apparant on your coin has NEVER been reported on the reverse of a wheat cent. That immediately draws attention to it not being a doubled die, but that's a matter of experience and knowledge. You couldn't have known that ahead of time.

4. All the edges of the design elements in the area with the 'doubling' are weak and lacking sharp definition...yet another sign of die wear.

5. The direction of spread indicates movement toward the rim AND toward one direction. This would mean the hub had to grow AND be rotated in such a fashion to give that doubling. This simply doesn't happen.

The coin in the beginning of this thread is worn. The doubling isn't clearly separated in some areas for that very reason. BUT...it still shows notching in the corners of the letters, the letters are nearly double-wide, and the edges of the devices still have some definition...they don't wear with coin wear, only die wear. The edges of the devices are the most protected areas on the coin because these are the areas that you cannot touch with a finger...too big. All signs on this coin add up to a doubled die.

Then there's the facts that that date is well known for doubled dies, there are photos of very similar coins on this site and in other books and publications, and the rotation is evident all over the coin. None of these things add up with your coin.

Please note that I am stating everything I am here in the nicest typing I can to help you understand - I'm not trying to sound coarse or harsh here.

[Teryble]

You did a great job of making me understand in Laymen terms, exactly what I was asking. Much appreciated as well as your patience
Teryble