While looking through a roll of Mercury dimes, I came across this coin that appears to have a rim cud in two different places on the reverse:
My first impression was that the 1942 dime was not a cud . . . and after seeing the picture of the obverse I thought I was correct and wondered why no one chimed in. Hmmm so after looking at the suggested web site 'cuds-on-coins' it appears that 'lack of detail' on the side opposite the cud is not a hard and fast rule. . . . I was very surprised by the 1st 1944 coin the site listed.