Lets wait for another opinion.
that is 1989 mines is a 1992 The FG is clean theres no PMD and no polish marks I doubt Die Abrasion. They look similar or maybe that photo isnt...
Ok thanks a bunch Mike let me know what You hear.
ok thanks. Im going to post it on Lincoln Cent Resource and also contact Jame Wiles I believe I have his info.
Thanks Mike I took photos without the gunk also. there is no PMD and there is no die abrasion. The top of the G looks like an RDV-006 and the...
You need to start Your own thread for that coin cause it will cause confusion with this one.
Who said I was unappreciative? I just didn't agree with Non_Cents but I was appreciative of his info I said Thank You to him also. so what are You...
Ok thanks.
Its not a close AM and the G looks nothing like a RDV-006 so what would you call it? The length of the looks slightly longer on the bottom but it...
I am not trying to be funny but do you know the difference between an 005 and a 006? I uploaded 2 reference photos The first one is the RDV-005...
I cleaned the Gunk this is clearly a RDV-005 I know what im looking at I Have 1988 RDV-006 this FG is not an 006. this is an 005 look at how flat...
The G's are totally different Im sending it over to mike Cause this is definitely an RDV-005. Thanks.
You can tell by the flatness on the bottom of G its the same as a RDV-005 the RDV-006 The G is rounded at the bottom take another look. that bit...
You can cleary see this is not a RDV-006 the pictures I posted are clear enough and heres another example of the RDV-006 which this is not. this...
I just read here: http://www.errorvariety.com/Design/WAM-CAM.html RDV-005 exhibits a shallow and delicate FG (which is often polished with a...
This is a 1992 wide AM cent but why is the FG like this? its more like an RDV-005 FG instead of the RDV-006 FG.
Thanks.
Who was arguing? I just wanted to know what kind of error it was. Thanks anyway..
Thanks!
Separate names with a comma.