Overview of WAMs and CAMs WAMs and CAMs Through the years both the obverse and reverse of the Lincoln cent has been modified or changed altogether numerous times. The most obvious switch to the reverse was in 1959 when the Mint introduced the new memorial design and said goodbye to the wheat reverse. Over time the memorial reverse has been adjusted and fine-tuned; James Wiles, PH.D., chief variety attributer for CONECA has attempted to document the various design alterations and has assigned them numbers (J. Wiles: www.varietyvista.com). Dr. Wiles has now documented eight design changes to just the Lincoln memorial reverse and labeled them RDVs 001-008 (Wiles). With so many changes comes an increased chance that occurrences of one design being incorrectly used. These make for the way for a new category of variety being refereed to as Wrong Design (WD) varieties (J. Wexler: http://doubleddie.com). When one design meant for one year is erroneously used on another year, they are being called a Transitional Reverses (TR) (Wexler). These new varieties have been popular and in some cases are being traded at an extraordinary premium. This demand is spreading; old and new collectors alike are now scouring for both known Wrong Design varieties and potential new ones. For anyone that has not spent time studying methods of variety identification using the appropriate equipment, identification can be difficult. There are numerous and reliable resources available to aid collectors, here are a few: (Wiles: www.varietyvista.com), (B. Podraza: www.lincolncentresource.com), (K. Potter: http://koinpro.tripod.com) and (B. Crawford: Die Variety News Vol. 1, No. 2, July 2006, pg. 10). The following information is not meant to substitute for any known resources, simply aid them. Known Transitional Reveres include: 1988P & D both with RDV-006 (1988 Reverse of ‘89); and 1992P & D both with RDV-007 (called Close AMs or CAMs in reference to the close AM). All four examples have the design for the following year (1989 and 1993, respectively). The ‘88P TR has been found in large numbers while the ‘88D TR and ‘92D CAM have been very rare with numbers in the teens; the 92P CAM has only seen two examples surface. Wrong Design varieties have been plentiful. For unknown reasons, reverse dies (RDV-006) meant for proof coinage ended up paired with business strike obverses: 1996P, 1998P, 1999P & 2000P (all called Wide AMs or WAMs in reference to the wide AM). And in two cases, the opposite has occurred, with proofs. Business strike reverses (RDV-007) matched with proof obverses: seen on the 1998S & 1999S (called Close AMs or CAMs). There has been only one reported ‘96P WAM (B. Crawford); and only a small number of the ‘98S CAM proofs. Both the ‘99S CAM as well as the ’99 WAM are considered rare. The ’98 WAM and ’00 WAM have been found in large enough numbers to keep premiums relatively low in context of the other varieties mentioned. It is unknown if at other times from 1993 to 2008 if there were any other examples of dies being mixed up. It is advised to be on the lookout as the potential is very real. The changes in design are hard to detect in full. They all involve either a modification in the font used in the designer’s initials (FG) or the spacing between the AM in AMERICA. If searching with just a loupe, be advised that a cheap pocket scope would be a good purchase; these can be found at an electronics store. Also be forewarned that there are numerous forces, whether through the minting process or from contact from consumers (Post Mint Damage or PMD) that can alter these details thereby causing them to erroneously being misidentified as a particular variety. (Inspect both the FG and AM and always keep an example of each reverse handy for comparison purposes.) RDV-005 exhibits a shallow and delicate FG (which is often polished with a reduction in detail); and has a wide spaced AM. Used on P, D & S from 1986-1988 RDV-006 displays a more robust FG with a hooked G, (note, the FG is close to the memorial); and has a wide spaced AM. Used from 1989 – 1992 on P & D business strikes, and on S proofs from 1989 – 1992, and again from 1994 – 2008. Incorrectly found on ‘88P & D (called 1988 Reverse of ‘89); ‘96P, ‘98P, 99P & ‘00P (called WAM, sometimes called a type II reverse). RDV-007 shows a low relief FG that almost appears flat on the face. The FG has been moved further from the memorial and the hook on the G has been removed again. The AM is spaced close to the point where they are almost touching. Used from 1993 – 2008 on P & D business strikes and the 1993S proof. Incorrectly found on the ‘92P & D; and the ‘98S & ‘99S proofs (called CAM). Pictures: Jason Cuvelier
Great info. Thought I'd add this article on the 1996 WAM found. Thanks http://www.numismaticnews.net/article/1996_cent_displays_Wide_AM/
great thread, alot of information. i voted for ya for thread of the week. thank you for the great article. --BILL
Hi All, The 1996 Wide AM was reported on too soon. The coin was not authenticated. A few die variety experts saw high resolution images of the coin and we saw a seam evident on the obverse and if you remember, the reverse was supposedly rotated. The reason it was rotated is that the coin might have been a composite. Do not confuse this coin with the fabricated 1995 Wide AM that also had a rotated reverse. The 1996 was separate from the 1995 and both had the appearances of having been pieced together. Then under somewhat unusual circumstances, the coin was reported as stolen then the story was dropped as there was some question about the entire circumstance. The coin was not authenticated and subsequently a report was circulated that the entire situation was a little suspect. Thanks, Bill
1996 WAM: It should be noted that the '96 WAM is now missing and was unfortunately not examined by another variety expert. There was a '95 WAM reported that has been debunked as a product of two magic coin parts married together (presumably by accident). Magic coins could have been responsible for the '96 as well and creates an added layer of difficulty in future attributions of any new found WAMs and CAMs on years other than ones previously identified. Prices: The prices for WAMs and CAMs have fluctuated as more have been found. The '92P CAM, the '88D (reverse of '89) along with the '98S proof CAM have seen consistently high prices and very low numbers reported. A '92P CAM has yet to have a public sale and the jury is out on a estimated price. Both the '99P WAM and '99S CAM have seen prices drop, but still remain high. The large number of '98P & '00 WAMs and '88P (reverse of '89) found by collectors has seriously reduced their prices.
I went and dug through my old copies of CoinWorld and the April 6, 2009 issue has an article in which a lot of doubt is raised about the actual occurrence of the robbery and that lends a great deal of doubt to the story of the 1996 cent. In prior interviews with Billy and published in earlier editions of CW , it was stated that Billy Crawford stated that he was at the show, inferring that he had a table at the show. That was disputed by Randy Clark, the host of the show. Crawford never had a table and it was doubted that he was at the show at all. It was also stated by Billy that he reported the theft. He then denied reporting the theft. Interesting is that in earlier interviews, Billy reported that he had filed a police report with a Detective Jason Forsythe of the City of North Charleston Police Department yet In the April 6, 2009 edition, Forsythe sates that he had no contact with Billy Crawford in reference to any robbery. He (Forsythe) also notes that the place where the robbery was supposedly to have taken place is out of his jurisdiction. He goes on to say that Billy's claim that there was an ongoing investigation into the matter is (was) "completely false". Forsythe, by the way is Billy Crawford's brother-in-law. In other words, the stories provided by Crawford held several major inconsistencies, according to the CW article. All this plus the images of the coin lead many to truly, strongly and probably, rightly, conclude that the piece was not authentic. To even refer to it as a 1996 Wide AM is very likely going to perpetuate a myth. Thanks, Bill
Yeah I just found some high res pics of the coin and there was an obvious seam on the obverse. Most people just check the reverse for a seam so he must have missed it. I'm not accusing him of anything, but it sure was convenient for the coin to be stolen when it was.
WOW!!! lots of great info, thank you for the great pictures as well. if i can figure out how to do it ill nominate this for thread of the week as well. again thanks for the detailed information.
Anyone know where to find pics of the alleged possible 3rd 1992-P close AM that was NGC graded AU55Bn mentioned on this page? http://hermes.csd.net/~coneca/
From CONECA: "Note: Since these articles were published it has been confirmed that the Kie Brown specimen has been graded by PCGS as MS-62 Red; I have also learned (via images) that NGC has graded one as AU-55 BN but I have no idea from the information given when it was graded or why it is not listed in the NGC Population Report." I didn't even notice that this information was contained at the end of the article when I read it the first time. I have no idea...anyone else?
I'm really new to this nomination process but this post certainly provides plenty of info and education!! good for you jcuve!!
I appreciate the positive commentary, nominations and additional information that everyone has provided. Now I have a few final thoughts and comments to close this thread out. In regards to the 1999 WAM, there have been four (4) dies identified and illustrated by G. J. Lawson with further micro-photography by Ken Potter that be found HERE. Word is that the 1998 and 2000 WAMs were struck by many more dies – these are reportedly being studied, listed and documented. From what can be gathered there appears to be a unique die used for the 1992P & D CAMs, and the 1998S & 1999S proof CAMs. Dr. Wiles has documented the 1992D CAM and proof CAMs 1998S & 1999S. Dr. Wiles has documented two (2) dies used for the 1988D reverse of ’89 (RDV-006.1 & 006.2) found HERE. Dr Wiles has also documented five (5) dies used for the 1988P reverse of ’89, HERE. In light of additional information and the absence of an example to study, the 1996 WAM should be repudiated until which time the original or a subsequent example is identified and studied. As has been stated the purported 1995 with wide AM was studied and determined to be a marriage magic coin parts and documented by Charles Daughtrey HERE. The possibility of finding another magic coin with an incorrect obverse – reverse combination appears high and any examples found will have to be thoroughly scrutinized. Here is a picture of the obverse of the 1999S CAM (that was mistakenly not attached in the beginning).
