2020 doubled die amazing shield cent

So looking at the normal liberty you see how skinny it is then now compare that to my liberty. You see how much thicker it is and the upper right is thicker then the upper left of the Y?
Maybe me explaining it like this can help you notice more haha idk hopefully

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Last I heard the dies for this genera of "doubled die " is a single cutting done by a computer driven machine and the striking of a blank planchet with said die using a "single squeeze" press , SO where does any TRUE doubling occurring??? If it is a mechanical or software error in the computer or it is the Single squeeze die loose , either one should be a machine doubling and not worth anything over metal price or face value.

However some coin famous individuals would be out of business if new ones were not created and collectors went along with it, so it "must be true". Not to me .

Jim

 

Machine doubling is very distinguishable on shields tho. there are shield cents that have class 4&8 doubling and some that have just clash 4.
Have you see the strong 2014,2015,2019 doubled dies there is almost one for every year. coneca has a good section on all the classes and class 9 as well which I’ll paste below.

See also mechanical doubling happens with the die and the Planchet itself.
The doubled dies happen during the working hub and the actual die for the coin popping into place slightly or jolting which is seen on shield cents. I’ll also post a picture of mechanical doubling on a shield cent as well you don’t see md as much as you think on shields it’s seen a lot more on memorials.
“ CONECA Class 9 (IX) Single Squeeze:
When the working hub in a single squeeze hubbing press is set on a die blank untethered above, it can be at an initial tilt showing some horizontal deviation. Depending on the design used, the hub may sit on a precise spot at first contact. As pressure is exerted, the back of the hub will rock or jolt into its proper position creating doubling on the die face.

While Class 9 is tilted, it does not match the timing or sequence of class 8 tilted hub doubling. Class 8 typically resides along the periphery only, and needs a minimum of two hubbings, whereas Class 9 manifests during a single hubbing and can be located centrally or almost throughout the design.

There are two types of doubling:
Jolted (Type 1): mimics offset doubling, and is focused in a hot zone of the central design elements. Parts of a device are replicated in the adjacent open fields. They can be marginal, offset, or even show rotation. There is a maximum spread, and a limit to how much is duplicated. Typically, there is one region on a coin’s design where almost all doubling occurs. This can be surmised by similar doubling found on coins from Denver and Philadelphia. (e.g., 2009 Lincoln cents)

This type of doubling is created earlier in the hubbing, when the die can still jolt back into correct position leaving only a trace of doubling. It should be noted that doubling could be caused, at least on occasion, by the press being reset during a hubbing – there is no clear indication as to how often that occurs.

Decisive examples include: 2015P 25c NE DDR-004; 2009 1c FY DDR-002; and 2009D 25c DC DDR-001

Roly-poly (Type 2): The second type is characterized by an offset distorted extra thickness that is roly-poly in appearance. Doubling can manifest over a larger section of the die, including the periphery. Doubling is typically stronger centrally and weakens toward the edge of the design. The doubling is related to type 1, with horizontal play between the hub and die, but the point of contact seems unceasing, and instead of a jolt, it rolls under pressure extruding the design as the tilt stabilizes. On some examples, there is a wobble, accounting for notched corners and separation lines.

This type of doubling can be secluded to a small area or can be widespread. The doubling is unlike class 4 with milder separation lines, soft corner notching and a roly-poly extra thickness. It is unlike class 6, in that the distortion is offset, and does not distort toward the edge.

Key examples include: 2006 1c DDO-003; 2015 1c DDO-001; 2012P $1 BH DDO-001”

 

I agree.

 

I mean yes it’s niche everyone will have there opinion etc I don’t mind but it reminds me of the 60’s 70’s where dealers and collectors didn’t consider errors valuable some did yes but most over looked them etc now look where they are not saying the same will happen here in the end but I feel shield doubled dies are ahead of their time

 

Most definitely a doubled die. You can also see the slant on the bottom of the letters that's indicative of these doubled dies.

 

Hey glad u can spot them oh nice profile pic I recently got one for my collection with the 95° rotation as well

 

I have read through and been following this post. My personal opinion is this. When the working hub jumps or twists during striking of the die it is no different to a die jumping or twisting when striking a planchet. Yet, lo and behold, one is classified as a no added value machine doubled coin and the other is classified as a doubled die just because it happened to the die. If anything they should be called machine doubled die varieties.
The only reason being that someone needed there to be a source for the continuance of doubled die varieties after the single squeeze method was introduced, effectively ending the creation of TRUE doubled die varieties.
An "anomaly" that most times need heavy magnification to see is not for me.
I am not denigrating those that actively hunt and collect these, just stating my feelings of absolute indifference towards these poorly made, rather boring coins.

 

One of the big differences is that unlike md, the doubling is on the same level.

 

Of course it would be as it is the incused part of the die. Still caused by machine doubling

 

Your eyes may be 20/20 but your coin is a normal 2020 zincoln.

 

"The doubled dies happen during the working hub and the actual die for the coin popping into place slightly or jolting which is seen on shield cents."

And how is that not mechanical doubling? The die doesn't come out of the process with a doubled image ? it was a vibration, that is mechanical event.

Of course the class 9 description was only inserted in books recently compared to the original entities. In the Authoritative Reference on Lincoln Cents ( 2nd ed.) by
Wexler and Flynn they (writing about single squeeze doubling) seemed half hearted in putting in the Class 9 which they called " Only God Knows " as the description of how it happened. To me, it seem it just allows people on eBay and others to call them DD, to increase interest by novices and the pricing. People can call a seal a canine because it barks also, but I won't go that way. Best of luck. Jim

 

What is your opinion on some of the doubled dies that are clearly extreme examples. (2019 wddo-011, or 2014 wddo-003, etc) Would we just consider all the new forms of doubling mechanical doubling to save the old style of doubling as king? Saying there is a new style of md. Those are clearly doubled tho. Or is it by saying there Are doubled dies on the new coins, new dies, technology etc it makes the old timers butt hurt that what they knew as doubled die is no longer a thing and “old school”
I hope that makes sense and comes off as I want it too I mean no aggression only throwing out my thoughts.

 

The old ones are what they are, the evidence remained on the used dies . The class 9 has doubling, but it is not a doubled die as the 9- die used shows no doubling on it after use, it may be damaged from so much vibration though.

My butt does not hurt, as the value of the true doubled dies stay strong and I have a collection of them. I do also have some strong vibration caused variety # 9, that I can use for references. I have never bought a class 9 nor sold a class 9 calling it a doubled die. Anyone can call a coin anything they wish as there is no rule against it. Jim

 

Knowing about the different classes in general you can pair up them up to certain shield cent doubled dies with the characteristics. Some class 6 others class 8, class 4 and some mixed ones classes 4&8 on one die.
Cause it’s a newer year, different style design, composition, how the dies r setup anvil as obverse now, and how they strike the Planchet single squeeze brings whole new outlook to doubled dies I feel. No?

i mean the “ doubling” in question Starts between the working hub and the actually dies themselves it’s already on the die itself that’s why they all are the same.
So how could we say machine doubling if that actually happens from the die striking the Planchet that means then the doubled dies that are all the same on shields should vary then or not be as many around then.

 

Now I'm confused. Are you trying to say there is no evidence on the shield dies of the doubling?

 

Just what I would have said had I put in the time.

 

No, I think he is saying it should not be considered doubling, and I happen to agree with him.

With the application of single-squeeze in die manufacturing the powers that label everything had to call “extra-thickness” something to catagorize it. At the same time, notching, slanted letter bottoms/tops and distorted striking results were included as well. I believe that was the mistake that precipitated the polarizing confusion among collectors. A new category should have been created, something along the lines of: “Die Strike Distortion” (IMO).

@JCro57 @Paddy54 @Collecting Nut @potty dollar 1878 …hopefully, by now, you all have had a chance to see what @Rick Stachowski has confirmed and that others also agree, that this is truly a listed doubled die at Wexler: WDDO-001. As stated, whether it should be labeled a doubled die will remain a matter of conjecture.

One final note: @Gorham_Collector is the wave of the future for Coin Collecting, in the sense that he is specializing in Shield cent anomalies. He has shown his extensive reading and research regarding them. He is among those in our hobby whose work may become as important as any coin discipline done in the past, and become important data for future collectors. One may not agree with his focus, but no one should fault him if he produces accurate research.

 

I have seen these before and know of them before this thread I just don't see a difference but if @Gorham_Collector sees it I believe the same fact.

 

I can see what ur saying about the extra thickness and then there’s some with notching splitting extra thickness etc who knows In the future it could change to that with more research on them who knows

I appreciate that comment a lot
i do realize it’s “super” niche, it’s “new” and it’s controversial but I’m in it for the long run and to help educate and enjoy the hobby.
again in my mind it reminds me of the 60’s & 70’s with errors like i said in a previous comment.
A thread like this is good made me think more.