I realize that you are new here, also on the young side. Just slow down and post facts, no one will find fault if that is done. Rpm's are not the result of hub doubling, I know we talked about that in another thread. Also the coin has quite a bit of damage and with out better pics the MM could also be victim of that. I am not sure there is even a RPM shown. Clearer pics of the MM would be needed @Travis G
Yeah it's a low quality picture, but it looks like an RPM because to 5he left of the coin, you can see the base of another D and over the coin there is a split seriff. However, there is substantial damage especially in liberty
Damage can make anything look like a possible variety or error. But it takes die markers and MM position to identify an RPM. An FYI, folks that are completely new to coins can easily be misled. Before saying that the MM "IS" an Rpm, one should ask for clearer photos, before making an assumption.
I know, I was just saying that, based on the quality of the photos it does appear to be an RPM but one can't be sure without better images.
I agree with better photos. Remember that in this time period, the mint mark was done by hand on the die after hubbing and since it was by hand, it was often at a slight angle, so care has to be taken with the photo and should be square to the coin, not at an angle. Jim
I did notice the wear on the chin and brow. I don't know that pictures will help much. I looked at some of my 60D's and they pretty much look the same. It must have been a bad year at the mint. Dies were probably ready to be retired. The General
