So I was noticing something that got me to thinking. (That seems to happen a lot with me). For some reason, it seems that in the "modern era" (post -1965), true doubled-dies seem to be almost exclusive to cents. Of course there are countless varieties out there and a plethora of machine doubling but I'm using the Redbook as the baseline as these are the "big" ones that are significant enough to be included in their lists and thus become kinda "the norm" when talking about DD's. Other than the lone 74d Kennedy, they are all found in cents. Is it entirely randomness and coincidence or is there a technical reason why cents would be more prone to this error? Cents: 1969s, 1971 and 1971s proof, 1972, 1983 reverse, 1995 Nickels: none Dimes: none Quarters: none Halves: 1974d Dollars: none
Just to clarify my thoughts more..... I realize that there are literally hundreds of minor doubled varieties. There are probably doubled varieties for every date/mm combo out there. So I'm talking about "the big ones". What makes them one of the "big ones". These are the ones that are found in the Redbook and Bluebook and just about any other price guide you'd look in. Could it be that the authors at Whitman simply have a tendency to list cent varieties? Could it be the number of examples found? I don't think that's it since the 69S supposedly has less than a dozen examples (I think). I don't think its value as the 95 DD can be found for around $50 but the 69S is extremely valuable. So my original question could be reworded: "why these specific 6 varieties among the hundreds or thousands available?" and "why are 5 of the 6 cents?"
10x as many pennies are minted than the other coins. Maybe that is the reason as more dies have to be made so there are more chances for error? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Mint_coin_production
Production numbers as sam said. Also, the mint was really pressured to produce cents quickly. In their haste to keep the presses churning, they made a few QC mistakes and a few managed to slip through before they caught them.
That's a valid theory which I obviously hadn't thought about. Sheer number of coins minted means more dies created which means more chance for error.
One other reason is the size of the dies. The major DDO cent have a displacement between the two hubbings of 2 degrees or less. Think about the image separation on the 69 S cent or the 1972 DDO die 1 cent. That same amount of displacement, 2 degrees, on say a quarter die would result in the letters around the rim being offset by close to their full width. That is going to JUMP out at anyone one inspecting the dies. So it is just much easier to detect and condemn a DDO die on a larger denomination except for the dime. Also there is just more interest in collecting cents than the other denominations so errors are more likely to be listed for cents in general works like the Redbook than on other denominations.
The popularity of cents and number of dies produced led to the numbers you see. The major DDO that I don't see in your list is the 1976-D quarter, which has a really nice spread on LIBERTY, and is much more impressive visually than the 1971 DDO. Being a quarter rather than a cent is probably why it didn't end up in the Red Book. The contents of the Red Book can also be influenced by collectors, and if the cent DDO collectors are more numerous and/or influential than the quarter DDO collectors, the cents will be given more attention. @Conder101 's comment about the size of the die magnifying small rotations on nickels, quarters, and halves is valid for Class I doubling (rotated hub) on the biggies like the 69-S and 72, but for Class IV doubling (offset hub) like on the 1983 cent reverse, this wouldn't be the case.
It would also be valid on pivoted hub doubling such as on the 1995 DDO cent. I agree it wouldn't have much difference on offset hubbing. After 1997 with the introduction of single squeeze hubbing most of the doubled dies are tilted hub doubling which is usually strongest in the center area of the coin and there usually isn't much there to show the doubling. An exception to that is with some of the state quarter and ATB quarters that have small discrete features in the center of the die, such as all the "extra trees" DDR's on the Minnesota state quarter. (Over 60 different ones) Or the dozens of DDR's on the LP2 cents.
I think, after reading all the great replies, this is probably the most likely explanation for my original question. It ultimately comes down to popularity.
CONECA master listings can be viewed online. They include every type of variety to include DDO / DDR. Like coin collecting and collectors not every coin is rare and not every variety is sought by every collector. The price of the 1995 DDO cent reflects the fact that they can still be found in circulation. Others like the 1969-s can not or at least have not yet been found in quantities sufficient to limit sales. I am no longer a member due to changing tastes and diminishing eyesight but they do good work and are the experts at this sort of thing. Red Book tracks recent sales. They are forced to list every date and every mint mark of all current circulating coins. They limit the varieties they list to those with a premium and recent sales. While they are forced to list a common cent with an MS-65 values of twenty five cents they will not list varieties with such low values. I predict that there would be a five dollar minimum on varieties in mint state or possibly even higher.
