Need some expert help on 3 coins

There are 3 coins (posting separately) I'm interested to hear what the experts say and perhaps educate. I appreciate any help and/or discussions.

The first is simple, 1983 Lincoln Cent - die crack, cud? For whatever reason, I could not find a similar example.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Second coin, is a 1940 wheatie . I've stared at this for probably way too long, but it looks like writing inside the die crack.

 

1983 - Look sto be a slightly misaligned die or a slightly off center strike. Would have to see the reverse to know for sure.

1940 - Lamination.

 

Last coin is a 1937 Buffalo Nickel. I understand the "shelf" doubling as MD. What the picture isn't showing, is both are flat and the doubling is the same. Also, pix of the nose I'm curious for an opinion.

Machine doubling or not, it is still pretty cool. Follow up question, if a double die is much more rare, how would you classify if a particular MD had only produced a very small % of coins

 

The Buff - Definitely MD. The nose just took a hit sometime during it's long life.

 

more pictures

 

Thank you. I've read as die crack and lamination. Appreciate you clearing that up. Any opinion on what's going on inside the lamination? (picture of reverse 83 coming)

 

The lamination looks normal. Not sure what you are asking about what is going on inside it.

 

Why definitely an MD? What do I look for, besides the "shelf" ... like I mentioned they are both flat, hard to see in picture. I really do appreciate your expertise with this.

 

lol,, honestly, I don't know how to explain it if you don't see it. I added the reverse 83 in original post

 

So with that being the reverse of the 83, I would say it is a slightly misaligned die.

 

The use of the term shelf doubling is incorrect. Flat and shelf-like is a descriptive of machine doubling.

The Indian's nose looks like it took a hit.

True hub doubling is created on the die, itself, during the production of the die.
Machine doubling is the result of the die being loose and vibrating rapidly, back and forth, as the coin is being struck. In both cases, there is no way of knowing how many coins are produced, so rarity between the two is a non-issue. What is important to remember is that when hub doubling alters the (intended) design of the die, a new variety is created.

Chris

 

The lamination looks like a normal lamination. Nothing out of the ordinary.

 

I do not see a die crack or a cud on the first coin. Keep in mind that a cud is a break along the rim that extends into the field.

Chris

 

You're too intent on seeing something that isn't there. However, there is nothing "normal" about a lamination error. It is simply a defect in the coin metal.

You must realize that so many "Mint Errors" are one-of-a-kind occurrences that are rarely repeated. You might look at billions and billions of other Lincoln cents and never see another one exactly the same.

Chris

 

You are much better at putting things into words than I am

 

I hated English composition and essay writing in school! Maybe it was because they were trying to force me to do something that I didn't want to do.

Chris

 

I am a linguist by trade. I blame it on having 2 other polar opposite languages crammed up in my brain fighting for room with English Sometimes I have a hard time putting together a sentence in English without using words from one of the other languages or their associated grammar patterns. My wife really enjoys it... /sarcasm

 

So, if you wanted to win an argument with your wife, wouldn't it be best to use words and phrases from each of the three languages in every sentence just to confuse her?

Chris