Hello guys, I've been roll hunting again and came across some interesting pennies. They are both 1971 S but one appears to have the mint mark higher and possibly DBL Obv? I took some pics in hope of getting a bit of aid with the visuals, hoping it's not just my bad vision. The coin in question would be the one on the left. To me the lettering at the top, as well as date and Liberty show more bulge and thickness which would signify the DBL error. This is also the coin that has the mint mark much closer to the date. Tried to super scope a pic from above to show the difference. So with that, any opinions on these? Also thank you in advance for any info or input
Those mint marks were punched into the dies by hand. As long as they were not actually touching any of the devices or the rim, they passed QC. Not an error, but keep looking.
Ty so much for the info! I can set these aside now and get back to the other boxes of pennies I need to hunt through, ill have to post up some of the sure stuff later at once so it doesnt flood either.
Not to quiver over the timeline of this but it was the late '80's that this change was made. Source: https://www.cointalk.com/threads/mint-marks-little-help-please.193247/#post-1279130.
Well maybe, though I think some depends how far into the esoteric you wish to look. First, agreed with the mint mark placement, as long as it's not touching the date or design elements, just about anything goes. As for any possible doubling, I can see what appears to be some extra thickness on some lettering on the left coin, which COULD indicate doubling . . . but what class of doubling? From what I'm seeing (but I don't have the coins in-hand) I think only one really fits the bill and that would be a Class III or "Design Hub Doubling". This may be an interesting artifact (if artifact at all) of what really caught my eye when I first looked at these coins, and that is I believe the two coins reflect, at a minimum, 2 different ODVs (Obverse Design Varieties)! And if the path I'm going down has any merit at all, then it's likely that one or both of these coins (most likely the one on the right) are also transitional. First let me say, what I am positing here is based on the work(s) of James Wiles, Ph.D. (which I hope I'm not butchering too much) and the materials contained in 3 of his "e-books" (The Lincoln Cent Doubled Die; Lincoln Cent RPM and most importantly; the CONECA Die Variety e-book). In brief, every so often the US Mint makes changes to a die's design; most are minor and are seldom noted. Often these modifications are made to the Master Hub (MH) at the same time that a new date series is being impressed on them, and ever so often a change is made on a Master Die (MD). Then once in a great while two of these altered MHs or promoted MDs end up being used to make a Working Hub (WH) or Working Die (WD). Whatever the case and however this may have occurred, the end result can be a coin that has the features of two different ODVs (or RDVs as the case may be, though these are much rarer). Dies for years 1969 through 1971 were derived from MH-24. The major design change (from MH-23 to MH-24) was the enhancement of the portrait, though there were additional changes such as a more inward pointing lower serif of the "9". For 1970 MH-24 was altered to MH-25, which produced the "Large Date" coin for that year. In addition MH-24 was also altered to make MH-26, thereby producing the 1970 "Small Date" coin, AND in addition, the inner serif of the "9" in the date was made more pointed than the Large Date "9", and pointed in a SE direction (please remember this salient). For 1971, MH-27 (again basis MH-24) was made whose major feature was a re-engraved lower throat and, I believe, the inner serif of the "9" was made to point more inward. Also in 1971, a MH-28 was made that also re-engraved the bowtie. However, this MH may have had as its basis an enhanced WD, but a WD produced by MH-28, or 27 or even MH-26; the answer is not clear to me, but could have a significant role in what is possibly being observed in these two coins. Step back for a moment and look at these two coins again . . . it seems to me that there is a distinct difference in the lower portion of the throat; the bowties appear to be different; the apparent difference in the spread of the lettering has already been noted (and at this point it is good to remember how Class III or "Design Hub Doubling" occurs: It can only occur when two or more design varieties are in production at the same time, or in other words, you start with a hub with one design and then a hub with a slightly different design is used for the subsequent hubbing. The resultant WD will then end up striking a "transitional" coin; most or all of the intended ODV will be present, but it also may have some artifact from a previous alteration). So back to the inspection of the coins in the instant case . . . while I would need to have both coins in-hand to be sure, it appears to me that the inner serif of the "9" on the coin to the right, is pointed more to the SE than its comparable on the left, where it appears that the inner serif of that "9" is pointing almost directly East! The implication would be that the coin on the right is a transitional as it carries the design of the inner serif of the "9" as seen on MH-26. But wait, wait that would mean that the coin on the right is the "transitional" coin, which would mean that the coin on the left is not doubled. Well, yes and no . . . yes it would mean that the right hand coin is "transitional", BUT the coin on the left is whatever the coin on the left is. One would have to look at that coin against other apparently "normal" 1971 S cents; one would also look for any other indicators that doubling has occurred. And last but not least one would have to be starting from a premise that my assumptions are in any way valid. I mean it makes sense to me based on what I have read, but I've obviously over-simplified this overall concept . . . possibly to the point of making the analyses useless. And we (or I) have to recognize that I'm getting a little long in the tooth and it is getting late; I may wake up tomorrow, look at this and say, "What the Hell is this gibberish!" However, I would prefer that this effort provides you with some alternative ideas on how you may want to look at this, and other head scratchers you will come across in the future, as apposed to putting the coins on a shelf some where and thereby risk missing out on something interesting that was right at the tips of your fingers, if you had only stretched a little further. LORD, it is getting late, say what!!! Semper Fidelis (and PS, I would really love to see a couple of good pictures of the reverse of those two coins (identifying them in the context of their display today))!
Again, let me ty for the reply in advance. I am still learning so this information is greatly appreciated. Even though it may be a long shot, which is fine, I took some extra pictures of the reverse, if anything just to check them out. Hope they are better this time around.
A couple of the Rev shots are fine. Unfortunately, the new Obv pics have two much light on them. Regardless, since you have the coins in-hand, just set them down side-by-side and take a real close look at the "tips" at the end of the loops of the nine (a magnifying glass might be helpful). First note if they are both "pointed" or do one or the other have a different shape. Next, and probably most important, look to see if there is a variation in the "direction" the tips are pointing (Top of the coin being North). Both tips are pointing Right (or East), BUT does one of the tips appear to be pointing more ESE than the other? If possible, find a good quality 69 and both Large and Small date 70's for comparison. Try and compare the directions of tips of both of your 71's to the 69 & 70's, and let me know what you find (that is if you want to). I won't tell you what I'm hoping you find as I don't want to bias your observations anymore than I already have. As for the reverse pictures, I just left for a 3 week vacation yesterday and I can't remember (an aging mind is a heck of a thing to get used to) exactly what aspect I was looking for (though I know there was a specific alteration in the design), but when I get a few minutes in a day or so, I'll look for the details. One last thing: every one has to start somewhere and "learning" is a life long process (they way you will know for sure that you are dead is the day you realize you are no longer capable of learning). So there is really no such thing as a silly question (unless you ask the same question over and over again, like the guy who has elicited 18 pages of responses because he won't take NO for an answer). Sometimes you will have to place something aside because the Parts aren't clicking into the Whole, Yet! Just keep the background stuff in your memory banks and sooner or later the whole picture will come together. Besides, by doing that, you may end up not being "Right", but you'll never be "Wrong" because you will have inculcated the process to discovery! Semper Fidelis
No problem, again I appreciate the info especially if you are on vacay, Enjoy! Be sure to check your change for randos!
I'll try and take a closer look when I get some time (I'll be here in NY for a couple of more days). But in the meantime, may I ask how you obtained the $25 of Cents (Ebay, etc.) and were there any expectations that there may have been some wheats in them??? Semper Fidelis
I frequent my bank a lot (Woodforest National), well I should say my Main Branch, the smaller ones around here refuse to give me boxes of change for some odd reason. Ive been going to them for the last couple of months and they tend to always have every box in stock bank rolled. I have just been really polite and patient with them, now they waive the fee's for me if I have to order boxes, which again is rare.
