2020 doubled die amazing shield cent

And that’s a valid argument I guess we can say it was all jumped into calling it doubled dies still maybe, or maybe not. Who knows.
Odd and new battle for sure and also old vs new. Possibly in the future years we’ll see more clear info and have a better understanding of what’s going on.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I’ll say this in response to the people who say it md within the hugging the process to the die.

what about the other classes of doubling then classes 4 (offset hub doubling) class 6 (distended hub doubling) and class 8 (tilted hub doubling)
There are shield cent doubled dies with these classes of doubling for example 2014 wddo-002 & 003 are examples of class 8. And we got 2015 wddo-006 a class 4 doubled die.
Also 2019 wddo-011 is a class 9.
There are examples like 2015 wddo-008 that are classes 4&8.

so with that said then are we gonna call all the older coins with classes of doubling 4,6,8 md with the hubbing? And only say class 1 is the only form of doubling that matters I understand that reasoning with how it occurs and HOW IT LOOKS ETC more appealing. Then these other classes.
mid that’s the case we’d be kissing some great older date varieties away with these classes of doubling. And labeling them as nothing important according to what I’ve seen throughout this thread. Just some of my thoughts opinions. Scattered here

 

If you were searching for Doubled Dies, errors, etc.
You wouldn't have any problem finding one on a memorial cent.

For the most part you wouldn't need a 100x or more scope to see the doubling. That is the hardest part to deal with for me on these new single squeeze DDO/DDR. They are for the most part minor compared to the days of old.

As you have seen in this thread, it's a 50/50 chance that anyone even seasoned collectors see what you have found. Compare that to an 83DDR or a 55, 69, 72 DDO. They are night and day comparisons.

 

We

Yes night and day for sure
i mean it’s all still relatively new more research and such has to go into it with this single squeeze hubbing.

That’s true an obvious doubled die or something that is wrong with the coin would be easy to spot but yea I was thinking of the “minorish” examples of memorial.
And the shields are minor compared to the old doubling but there are extreme ones when compared to the new of today.
Interesting to think and talk about.
I believe some still command a premium like 2014 wddo-002 or 2018 wddo-001 those are super scarce examples of doubling or what people want to call what’s happening with it. In 60 years I think the shields and it’s doubled dies (to me) will be collectible & looked upon as such and sought after

 

nope because i don't believe it is a DDO

 

Still not seeing it.

If you need more than a 10x loupe to see anything, it ain't worth it.

 

Well said and thank you because you saved me a lot of time in responding to other comments.

If others want to nit-pick, isn't all hub doubling created by mechanical means? Are we to eliminate all Doubled Dies? At the end of the day, the doubling, whether conventional or single-squeeze is only on one(1) working die. And that is the definition of a Doubled Die variety (not an error).

I know most members here are familiar with this information but Wexler's DoubledDies.com has some clear descriptions of the two processes and the current understandings for doubled dies. Collectors can read the info at this link.
http://doubleddie.com/58222.html
Wexler refers many times to both methods as producing doubled dies.

(BTW-MD has always been used to refer to striking issues on the coin, not the hubbing process.)

I'll add the following:
-Class 4 doubled eyelids resemble a lot of modern hub doubling towards the center of the design.

-Class 3- The 1960D SD/LD was created by the two different die designs used that year. (I'm not sure the reason this variety was mentioned.)

-Class 6- Some collectors turn their noses up at this class as well since there is no separation associated with this form of doubling by itself, just thickness.

We all collect what we find interesting and can afford. If someone doesn't care for modern doubled die coins, so be it, but they are produced from doubled dies.

Good thing I was able to keep this short and to the point.

 

But the point is the doubling looks different when it's due to a second-hubbing than when it's due to a skip or a slide in a single-hubbing, and there's where the confusion manifests. Let's remind ourselves, strike doubling is doubling, too, but we've learned to differentiate it from die doubling, because it's not on the die. In the case of single-squeeze doubling, that is on the die, that's how the die looks. They've the same exact attributes as strike doubling, though, except, again, they're on the dies, themselves. That's why we can call them die doubling. Except, and this is the kicker, in terms of criteria or attributes, they've nothing whatsoever in common with doubled dies due to second-hubbings. Thus, looking for those, namely, "notching" or "split serifs" in single-squeeze doubled dies, is an oxymoron, pure and simple. We're rather looking for strike doubling attributes in single-squeeze doubled dies, not what we're accustomed to as doubled die attributes, because, again, and for the third time, those latter are unique to double, not single hubbings.

 

I see what your getting to @eddiespin These new Doubled dies that are extreme show severe extra thickness, they show notching, and the second devices aren't any lower than the primary. They look nothing like strike doubling and they are part and on the die. None of this happens during the striking process. It happens during the Hubing process.

 

You're looking for strike doubling attributes in these. You're not looking for notching or split serifs, as those are impossible in single-squeeze hubbings, illusory on single-squeeze doubled dies.

 

I see notching and some split serifs on Gorhams coin.
Here it is again. Look at Liberty.


Especially the ERTY. I can even make out some separation lines.

 

Any chance you have an image to share showing this "skip or slide" doubling?

Here's an example of single squeeze doubling. (No the skip or slide here!)
2009-D 25c DC DDR-001, 1-R-VIII

The above image IS from a single squeeze doubled die. What part of this variety doesn't match the "old" style of double hubbed dies?

 

Even with a 10x loupe you can’t even really see some of the extreme varieties that are even on variety vista/coneca
funny

 

"In the Wexler Die Variety Files we define “doubled die” doubling as doubling produced on hubs or dies as a result of a misalignment of the images on the hub and die at some point during the hubbing process." https://doubleddie.com/58222.html. To answer your question, that's due to a skip.

Again, that's due to a skip. Go over that link I just gave you and try to get a grip on the process, this guy does a pretty decent job explaining it.

 

I see what you’re saying comparing to strike doubling md from the die to coin only it happening on the working

i see what ur getting now I understand what u mean
I’ve seen

you mean skip or slide like a chatter of the die instance like tilted hub doubling class 8 or the class 9 explained on coneca

 

Exactly, @Gorham_Collector, and thanks. It's hub-to-die, instead of die-to-planchet. Hub-to-die remains on the die, right? Thus, it's imparted to every planchet struck by that die? Thus, in that sense, it's die doubling, as it's coming from the die, and, it's collectible, as it repeats on every planchet so struck by that die. It was imparted to the die in the same way as strike doubling is imparted to the planchets, though, by a hop, skip, twist, turn, slide, smear, pick an adjective, but you get it. And because it's not due to two hubbings, one can lose that criteria, namely, again, "notching" and "split serifs," in trying to describe these single-hubbed doublings. The criteria we're looking for there are the same as the criteria in strike doubling. The way the hub sinks into the die is a tad tricky in these single-hubbings, but there's the scene of the die doubling, basically, that movement that may occur, there. Wexler describes the process pretty good. I don't purport to understand every aspect, but enough of it, anyway, to know what's going on in these, I'm reasonably sure.

 

Here’s a great video too with time stamps of each class since on the subject of doubled dies by the one and only professor. Ken Peavy
RIP
https://youtu.be/3QQNn9148DM
Class 1 - 11:50

Class 2 - 27:16

Class 3 - 32:50

Class 4 - 36:10

Class 5 - 38:05

Class 6 - 45:45
Class 8 - 48:58

 

So can anybody explain the class four doubling, found on the shield Cent .

Correct answer: nobody can. Not Ken Potter., no experts out there .

Everything wrote on this thread is nothing more than a theory ...

 

Gosh, I love that tootsie roll look on the 06'
It has to mean that the Hubing process stopped at one point or another to harden the steel, or to fix a malfunction in the equipment..

 

He, Wexler, doesn't refer to the term "skip" in this link. That is your terminology that you have added to explain your preference. If he, Wexler, does use the term could you please copy and paste from the link where it is used.

LOL, I've got a really good grip on the process already.

Are you referring to the doubling on the 2009D DC quarter as being caused by a "skip" while hubbing the die? If so, Wexlers site describes exactly how this particular doubling occurred and it has nothing to do with a "skip". (And no one named Skip was involved either. )

From the link: (Again, no skipping is involved. Underlining is mine.)
"On October 1, 2009 I had the privilege of having a telephone conversation with George Shue, Senior Advisor in Manufacturing at the U.S. Mint. During this conversation the 2009-D Washington D.C. quarter with a major doubled die reverse came up. Mr. Shue noted that the Mint was aware of this doubled die error and how it occurred. This particular doubled die resulted when a hubbing press operator stopped one of the single-squeeze hubbing presses to realign the hub and die and then restarted the hubbing sequence. In the process a rotational misalignment of images resulted. Mr. Shue further noted that the Mint was able to reproduce the error in a test to see what caused the doubled image originally."

If you don't agree about what doubled dies are and don't care to collect these modern doubled dies that's up to you because that will be less competition for us that do. But you shouldn't try to sway other collectors because of your contrary definition/belief.
(By the way, I don't consider varieties to be errors, but you might?)