!945 Merc,whats under the 5 ?

Keep us posted and good luck

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Zero. All current dated dies and hubs are destroyed at the end of the year. (Reverses that don't have a date can be held over for use the following year.) Overdates since 1909 have been caused by the accidental dual hubbing late in the year when a die that receives a one hubbing from the current year hub and one hubbing from NEXT years hub. (During the latter part of the year they are creating not only dies for the current year, but also a stockpile of dies for the comming year so there won't be any delays in production after Jan 1st.)

So there would be no 1938 dated dies in 44 or 45 to get overdated, and no 1938 hubs to accidently overdate a 1945 die. And of course no 1945 dated hubs in existance in 1938 either.

 

Hi Conder

I understand the reasoning of your post and it is effectual in explaining how it could not happen, But what is it then ??

Rick

 

Post some good high resolution pics of the full obverse and reverse. Let's see if there is something else going on that you may have overlooked.....like clashed dies, etc.

 

Im pretty sure there is nothing else on the coin ,But take a look !!


Thanks
Rick

 

I have heard back from James Wiles coneca US coins !!

Here is a copy of His response !!

Rick:

If it is too good to be true it probably is. The
chance of there being an 8 under the 5 is
non-existant. You are probably seeing metal flow
lines.

Thanks,

James Wiles

Rick

 

Hi,
That sounds familiar
Have Fun,
Bill

 

Hey metal man can you retake the picture of the date? If you could that would be great.

The second images you posted show better contrast. This contrast may help in identifying the error. The original had little or no contrast due to the bleaching effect of your flash.

 

True, but it also sounds like he read a description and didn't look at any pictures, or see the coin in hand.

As for "chances being non-existant" I understand the logic, but it ignores the easily proven track record of the US Mint. Its more than possible that this was something done with intent by a mint employee, which does cancel it from being a true "error". (much like the Sac/washington mule "errors").

Not trying to be arguementative here, as I am more than willing to accept the coin may be nothing more than coincidental metal flow, but I've yet to see any conclusive statements. When trying to nail down the fact of a matter, language such as "probably, most likely, unlikely" is far from conclusive.

This coin got my curiousity up, and only hard facts will satiate it

 

Ho Ho thats pretty neat. How much do you think it costs being so minor in visibility but so few made.

 

HI Guys

I sent the same enlarged photo that you all have looked at,with a note of willingness to send the coin for an inhand look.

I dont really think it is any more unlikely for a 5 over an 8 on a mercury dime than it was for a DDO on the 2004 peace medal nickle .That was impossible !! Right !

I will get some better pics up.

Rick

 

It may be a coincindence, and the guru's may also all state its metal flow, but for a metal flow to look exactly like an 8 - ok, unlikely but possible - a metal flow to look exactly like an 8 AND be in the almost exact spot an 8 in a date would be if it were minted - way to many coincidences for me!!

IF it LOOKS like a duck, and QUACKS like a duck - it must be a duck!!

 

I must admit that I do not know yet what it is. But I have not had the chance to see the coin in person and I do not trust what the pictures seem to be showing. All I can say is that it needs further study. (I've seen a lot of things in photos that look like one thing but which turn out to be something completely different.)

 

How does a person get a study done on a coin like this , especially when organisations such as coneca disregard the coin as impossible to occur ??

I assure you that the pics are a true representation of the coin, I did not enhance them, or manipulate the coin!

Here is another pic without the flash ,, using difused backlight !!

Thanks
Rick

 

Maybe one thing you could do, is to take the coin to a local reputible coin dealer to look at very closely... maybe if you get someone with enough clout to back you up on the claim.. more people would listen. Personnaly i do not doubt your honesty (unlike some others about a brass cent), but in a way condor101 is correct... pictures have funny ways of showing things that are not really there. Maybe try a coin show where PCGS or one of the other top TPGs and have them look at it... it may cost some money, but if it turns out to be real.... it would be a small price to pay

good luck

 

I dont disagree with condor, I have a lot of respect for his opinion !!

I will pursue some other areas to get this coin into the eyes of the collecting community, as for local dealers , that is not an option, but I will be in Alb. in the coming weeks and may be able to find someone there who can look at the coin, I also have plans to take it to the college NMSU and see if I can get it photographed with a stereo microscope ,,,

I wont leave it alone until I get an anwer one way or the other .

Thanks for the vote of confidence Daggarjon,,I appreciate it !!

Rick

 

Charge on Metalman. I'm like you, perfectly willing to accept a coin is not something, but sortas, maybe's, can't be's, etc just don't cut it. Hopefully, you can get it into the hands of an expert who can tell us what it IS. "Curiosity killed the cat.......satisfaction brought it back " Keep us posted

 

You most recent picture is a perfect example of what I was saying. From that picture what I am seeing looks like die deterioration doubling.

As to how to get something like what you believe this to be taken seriously, Try to meet up with someone with a nationally know reputation at a coin show and have them examine it in person. Plus there is a good chance that the only way you ae going to prove it will be to find another high grade specimen (AU or UNC). Del Romines, the discoverer of both the 1942/1-D mercury dime and the 1943/2 war nickel spent years trying to get someone to believe that these overdates existed. The dimes was dismissed as damage and the 43/2 as just a die crack through the 3. It wasn't until a high grade dime in the early 60's that it was accepted, and the nickel was not confirmed until I believe the late 70's. Almost 25 years after he first found the variety. And in both cases Del is not well known as the discoverer because he was not the person who found the high grade confirming specimen.

 

Where's the "W" under the 1945?