2013-P Great Basin Wexler DDR-002

I've been looking for this one for sometime now, change find too .
Tough little sucker to photo too ..





Here the link to wexler
http://doubleddie.com/1445840.html

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Here's another image .

Coneca also has it listed
http://varietyvista.com/09e WQ Vol 5 ATB/2013PNVDDR002 quarter.htm

 

For those of us that love errors, weather they be minor or major, this brings up the subject of magnification. I've seen so many times here, that most say, using anything larger than 5X-10X is a waste of time, meaning these errors are not worth the time. I say no only because in order to identify some of the minors you need higher power or you will miss them. My lighted loupe has 3,10 & 30X and my age and eyes say I need the higher X to find these. To my knowledge James Porter is the only person to have put together an entire run of all of the 2009P Formative Cent errors and I know this would have been difficult w/o the higher X. This is quite an accomplishment. He is now attempting to put together a complete set that includes all of the various die stages. Nice find my friend.

 

@tommyc03 and @Rick Stachowski, would this be a different die "stage," or a different die, in and of itself?

 

It's just the way the images came out, details are very tiny on this coin and hard for this scope too pick it all up .

 

Rick, Tommy said this James Porter is identifying different "die stages." That would suggest to me they're all off the same die, just in different stages of use, wear and tear, what have you. I'm asking, is your "DDR-02" a different "die stage," i.e., EDS, MDS, LDS, or is it a different die, entirely, i.e., the DDR-02 die, as opposed to some other die? Are you following this madness?

 

I'm also taking images of this madness ..

 

I'm not quite up to par on die stages enough to give an educated explanation for this question but James is on Facebook on "Coin Seekers" along with Marilyn Keeney and David Egeland who I don't think is, but is also on Facebook, who both have made numerous contributions of different die stages to John Wexler's ongoing list of the Lincoln Cents from 2009. David was also very good with the Log cabin cent which is extremely difficult. I do know that it took James since 2009 until just this past year to complete the entire set w/o the various die stages and he certainly is probably looking at a good many more years trying to locate them to complete his new endeavor. New ones are always popping up and so the journey continues. You might want to contact them over there and see what they have to say. Just a thought.

 

@tommyc03, I'm not on any social media. But think it out. If this is a doubled die, it didn't happen at a stage in the life of the die, it was on it to begin with. Take the '55 DDO. That's a DDO, in whatever the stage.

What I think is happening, here, is, they're using "doubled die" liberally.

@Rick Stachowski, can you do the arrows thingy on these? Enable us to see what you're seeing, appreciate what you're appreciating.

 

The only thing I know about "stages" is that they are progressive. Due to die deterioration mostly, a small crack is considered a stage and as that crack progresses it takes on a different stage in it's life, eventually sometimes leading to a die chip in there somewhere. A crack may start in the hair and when it reaches the rim, is considered to be a fatal crack. These cracks and chips were not on the original die so I'm assuming this is where this die stage thing kicks in. I'm not really into collecting the different so called stages of these errors anyways, just the original doubled die. I do agree that the term doubled die is being used quite differently then when I first started and maybe too liberally as with the new so called doubled dies of the Shield Cents.

 

Yes, I think that's what they're doing with these. Calling them "doubled dies," though, well, it throws one a little. But having said that, I think stages in the life of the dies are interesting. We save cracks and chips at various stages, too.

 

Ok Eddie, here we go . first image is of the right branches .


Next, is the rest of the right branches


Since neither wexler or coneca are showing any arrows, I also think their talking about this area too . None of my other Great Basin have doubling here, or any other places .

 

Here's what wexler states: Doubling shows on the underside of the leaves (needles) north of the bottom right branch of the Bristlecone pine tree. Doubling can also be found on the underside of the tree limbs.

Here's what coneca states: Medium spread South on upper Right branches and leaves.

Both ( coneca & wexler ) are the same DDRs ..

 

Welcome to the new era of single squeeze hubbing, on the Schuler presses ....

 

I'll get you guys some full shots, in the morning ...

 

Eddie, you can't compare any of those DDOs to todays DDOs & DDRs .
Those weren't done on the Schuler presses, or single squeeze hubbing, either ....

It's a totally new ball park today ........

 

I love the reverse design of this coin .

 

Rick,
Congrats on your find!
The Stage A listed on Wexler's is my coin. This was a CWroll find that was in circulation. The difference in stages that John stated is that Stage A doesn't have the die gouge between the R and U that happened later. Here are some of my pictures of the coin. You can see some of the doubling without high magnification (or at least when I have my reading glasses on!). Again, congrats!

 

Hopefully they help you to verify your coin.

 

Then I'm actually starting to understand your method of madness, Rick. Now how's that for a recommendation? Lol.

But seriously, that explanation you just gave pretty much does it for me. I never understood that, before.