1959d lmc ddr?

I have been staring at this tube of BU mixed date/mm Lincolns I bought for a long time. When I get the chance, I have been trying to finish off my IDing and cataloging my non-US coins, but took a break. Tonight I grabbed my Authoritative Reference on Lincoln Cents and opened the tube. The second cent I looked at was this. Nothing is listed for the 1959D cent that I can find other than RPMs, so I'm wondering: Do you see what I see? There are 12 photos.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

More photos

 

Last of them..... unless there is a request?

 

nothin?

 

md.

 

Can you get a close up of the designer's initials (FG)?

 

here ya go!

 

silent, I think you may have found a 1DR-001. I say this because it looks like there might be light separation of "ONE CENT" and extra thickness of the designer initials.

Do you have another cent of the same year or close to compare the initials?

 

Is this what you mean lonegun?
http://www.coppercoins.com/lincoln/diestate.php?date=1959&die_id=1959d1dr001&die_state=mds

Here's a shot of lincoln on the coin in question, followed by a comparison shot of the designer's initials and the whole rev. of another 59D cent:

 

I think you got it silent! That is the one I mean.

 

Here is some recent discussion on one very similar to mine. http://www.coincommunity.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=108271

 

I would post it on the forum at lincolncentresource.com

The same people that chimed in on the one in your link will surely chime in there.

 

I'm not familar with the 59 cent doubled die but your coin has some ejection doubling for sure. it may also have a tiny bit of die doubling but I can't see it if it does. look at the top of the letters in the word states and the F in the word of. see how the top edge of the letters are raised up above the letters and pushed back over the top of the letters. this is caused by the letters getting caught up in the die when the ejector pushes the coin out of the die. I probably will get scolded for saying ejecting doubling because the experts wants to call all forms of the worthless doubling MD. but darn it ejecting doubling is totally different from die bounce doubling or die detoration doubling.

 

I would think that this is not it IMO. Coppercoins shows die scratches across the whole REV as a marker, especially in ONE CENT. I am not seeing those scratches on the coin in this thread. Can you get a shot of LIBERTY?

 

The absence of die markers can't be used to exclude a coin from being struck by a particular die. When the die is first put into service it may not have any markers such as die chips, gouges or polish lines. Those usually occur later in the die's life.
This DDR is a very minor one and hard to ID, even with good pics. I can't tell if it is or isn't.

 

I am just a novice at this, but The Lincoln on the reverse appears to match and the designer initials appear to have extra thickness. Generally, I would agree with non cents regarding markers, however, if the markers suggested are not conclusive one way or the other, then this may still have a possibility of being the real deal.

silent can you get a close up of the date and mintmark together? That may help because the relationship of the MM to date is another pretty big marker to look for on varieties.

 

You are totally correct. This specimen could be an earlier die state than the one listed on CC. But if LIBERTY and the date match up, then we can be pretty sure that it is indeed 1DR-001, hence me asking for the extra pics.

 

ok I'll shoot a few later tonight

 

more pics

How are these?

 

The pictures are good. Unfortunately, after comparing the mintmark location of your coin to that of 1DR-001, I can confidently say that yours is not it. Keep up the hunt!