The 1916 d dime is scheduled for grading and NGC website is showing a 12 day turn around so I will keep you posted.
Maybe I'm blind, but I'd have to say that yours resembles #2 the most. I've ruled out #1 because it's mintmark is higher than yours. I've ruled out #3 because it's mintmark is further from the leaf than yours. Also note the bottom leg of the "E". Yours appears rather "boxy" where on #3 it has a slight upslope at the end. I've ruled out #4 because the mintmark is lower and further from the leaf than yours. That leaves #2. While it's difficult to ascertain whether yours is an RPM or not because of the condition, the position of the mintmark is about the same, and the shape of the "E" is the same. I may be completely wrong, but that's the way I see it. Chris
Your coin looks genuine to me. The quickest way to "guess" is to look at the interior of the "D" mintmark - it should be roughly triangular on a genuine coin.
I was wondering if anyone was going to mentio the triangular center of the D. (This is also good for authenticating 14-D cents.)
I wish we could post this information about the trianular center of the D at the first page of this thread.
It looks like #2 to me. The 'cat's eye ' center to the mintmark looks right too. also, each mintmark position has a corresponding die rotation.
Have not forgot about you. The coin is in Quality control @ ngc and should know the grade shortly when they ship it.
Fake D Thanks for posting on my thread "1916 (fake D?) Mercury Dime" Collect89, I appreciate you sharing your experience. I'll attach a picture of my fake 1916 D for everyone's reference.
Hi, Your posting is GREAT. Your post is why I joined this forum, very informative and well done. Thank you very much. Jim
@Collect89 , that image of Die 4 shows a raised mark in the field just under the stem where the branch begins. It is kind of shaped like the top portion of the curve in the D. Is that a diagnostic for Die 4? It can't be a bad thing to revive this thread
I don't know. You would think that a raised mark in that protected area would be preserved on low grade coins. However, I've not inspected a bunch of low grade #4 mintmarks to be able to answer your question. Perhaps someone at CT could post their 1916-D with the #4 mm.
Here is mine, that exhibits that mark. I believe it is a die 4. The MM appears to have taken a slight ding at the bottom serif and top right where the curve is. I'm showing it straight on, as well as tilted to differing degrees to show that metal was displaced. What do you think?
the 4th and 5th photographs show it best. The serifs are pointy, not boxed and square like they should be. The mint mark is not correct, so I again say fake. Is yours authenticated, silent?
Not yet. This is why I asked if that raised mark in the field where the branch begins from the stem is a diagnostic for die 4. It is obvious that the reverse has some bag marks, but personally I don't believe they rule anything out. Maybe it's just me, but only the mm on die 1 looks boxed and square.... 2&3 are pointy and doubled.... Die 4 mm looks like pointy serifs albeit with a shadow to the north in the photo of die 4 @Collect89 provided in the OP
The Mint mark punch used on all 246,000 16-D Mercury Dimes is the exact same punch used on the 1914-D Lincoln Cent. Boxy and squared with boxy serifs. I know of no genuine 16-D Mercury dime with pointed serifs.