Lincoln Small Dates: a Overview and Visual Analysis.

jcuve · 11-05-2009, 01:48 PM

In an effort to reacquaint myself with the differences between SD and LD on the four (4) known years where such varieties occurred, the following comparative collages have been produced.

As noted in multiple sources (such as LCR [Podraza], Authoritative Reference on the Lincoln Cent, [Wexler & Flynn], the Cherrypicker’s Guide [Fivaz & Stanton) some common points of differentiation are:

1960 (P & D) proofs and business strikes - Small Date, the 9 is almost the same height as the 1 and 0; and the inner loops of the 9 & 6 have different heights.

1970S proofs and business strikes - Small Date: the 7 is almost the same height as the 9 & 0, the inner loop of the 9 points at the middle of the 7 (large date points at the base of the 7); LIBERTY lacks detail and is mushy in appearance. (Proofs have the same diagnostics).

1974 (P, D & S) business strikes - Small Date: the 9 & 7 are thinner; the 4 is narrow with the triangle inside also being narrower; the lapel catches the light and appears raised; the bow tie is different; and the details in the hair and portrait are mushier than the Large Date. It should be noted that Large Dates are frequently confused as being class VI DDOs. (The Small Date is unconfirmed on proof issues.)

1982 (P, D & S) proofs and business strikes - Small Date: is naked eye obvious, the date and motto are a clear crisp font. The 8 is smaller on top compared to the Large Date and the base of the 2 is curved where as the Large Date is straight.

James Wiles has done an exhaustive inventory of the Obverse Design changes for the Lincoln Cent. The number as noted by Wiles for the particular design has been noted within my illustrations (e.g., the 1960 SD is ODV-022).

1960 P & D:

1970 S:

1974 P, D, & S:

1982 P, D & S:

Jason Cuvelier

jcuve · 11-05-2009, 01:55 PM

It should be noted that the 1970S Small Date should have all of the diagnostics as opposed to just one or be slabbed. LIBERTY could be mushy on a Large Date due to die wear or other factors. Large dates are erroneously sold as Small Date on eBay frequently – take caution.

There exists a class VI DDO for both the 1974P and 1982P Large Dates – do not mistake a normal Large Date for one without proper die markers matching (see Coppercoins.com).

If one were to lay a table full of '74s (mixed with Small Dates and Large Dates), then place a light, low and to the left, you can pick out the Large Dates easily without magnification by the way the light hits the edge of the lapel.

DoK U Mint · 11-05-2009, 02:25 PM

This is a wonderful thread!

Marvo! I'll try to be back with question but right now I feel overwhelmed wonderful new info.

yorkiedad5 · 11-05-2009, 03:00 PM

wow, this is great!!!! nice job Jason.... I was always beating myself up trying to figure out what I have and dont have. to bad we cannot make this a (sticky) , so we can always go back to it if we need it. I put this picture up to show how I tell the difference on a 1960 cent. I might not work for everyone, but it makes it pretty easy for me. thanks again for this great thread--BILL

bobbeth87 · 11-05-2009, 03:07 PM

GREAT post! thanks.

fishaddicit · 11-05-2009, 06:10 PM

As normal, excellent info and pics to boot. Keep up the knowledge for us "younguns"

jcuve · 11-06-2009, 12:53 PM

A not on prices:

While in all cases, probably just by chance, the Small Dates (SD) tend to be rare, scarce or a little harder to find than Large Dates (LD) – only the 1970S SD business strikes, proofs, and a nice proof example of the 1960P SD command a noticeable premium.

The PCGS price guide, while not a good indicator of the value of a coin in hand, lists the 1960P and 1960D in MS-65RD as $5 and $2 higher respectively over LDs in the same condition – which isn’t much.

The 1970S SDs can be found for less than $100 raw, and again, most of the ones on eBay are actually LDs erroneously listed as SDs.

The 1974 SDs are less common than LDs but easily found and most collectors seem to ignore them (…maybe if albums created spots there would be more interest?). Take note there are two styles of S mintmark for the San Francisco business strikes.

The 1982 SD Lincolns, both clad and copper issues, are scarcer but still findable and really only worth more in a full BU roll.

...And thanks for the positive comments!

volker00 · 11-06-2009, 04:25 PM

Excellent post!

blue_oxen · 11-06-2009, 04:30 PM

on the 1982 cents I have been looking at the shape of the 2 is this also an accurate method for differentiating between the large and small dates?

EDIT ( never mind should have read the whole post instead of just looking at the pictures )

jcuve · 11-06-2009, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blue_oxen

on the 1982 cents I have been looking at the shape of the 2 is this also an accurate method for differentiating between the large and small dates?

EDIT ( never mind should have read the whole post instead of just looking at the pictures )

I should have included a few more arrows, the "2' would have been a good choice. I think the easiest way to tell is IGWT and LIBERTY which is very bold compared the SD which is delicate and thin...

foundinrolls · 11-07-2009, 01:54 AM

Nice Job! AND...thanks for pointing out the 1974 cents as many people pass them by altogether:-)

Thanks,
Bill

jcuve · 11-07-2009, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by foundinrolls

Nice Job! AND...thanks for pointing out the 1974 cents as many people pass them by altogether:-)

Thanks,
Bill

Thanks for the compliment Bill! And the '74s are pretty cool...

coop · 11-07-2009, 08:57 AM

Here is something I've noted about the 1974 Large and small dates. The reverses are different:

jcuve · 11-07-2009, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by coop

Here is something I've noted about the 1974 Large and small dates. The reverses are different:

This is an interesting idea - however, I’m not convinced yet. I examined some ’74 LDs and SDs and found several examples of this softer reverse on LDs. All the SDs had this softer reverse. I don’t yet see a design change, I think the softer reverse is just weaker and the lines are just not clearly visible. My thinking is, since the LDs were minted before the SDs, the reverses are stronger – as the dies (or possibly the hubs that made the dies) wore down they lost detail and toward the middle of the year and later the lines start to become less discernible. Maybe even a change in striking pressure because the aluminum was abandoned. I could be wrong, but I shot some ’74 reverses below. The top is a LD with a strong reverse, below is a LD with a weak reverese, then at the bottom is a SD, while weaker, certainly looks similar if not the same as the above minus some detail from the first reverse. If I can find time I will email Wiles and ask his opinion...

jello · 11-07-2009, 12:13 PM

Great post Jason!!!
this should be the post of the week!

Welcome to Coin Talk! Register Now, it's easy and FREE!