Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;desertgem, post: 2784974, member: 15199&quot;]Paddy using your image from post #1, let me give my reasons why I do not believe this is a DD. In that era, dies were made by more than one pressings to get the depth. If the 2nd pressing was not exactly on the first, then an offset would be produced. So imagine a normal width letter or numbers after the first pressing, now move it a little, say half the thickness of a number( date); and now press the second time. The first pressing could be cut in half, but the second&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; ( last) pressing would be full thickness, so the &quot;total width would have 1 1/2 times normal width, but one side would be the normal width, the other smaller. You can see an extreme in the 1972/72 below on the date and the thickness. Each side is close to being full, but the total thickness is almost twice a normal date</p><p><br /></p><p><img src="https://www.cointalk.com/attachments/1968-s-date-mm-62917-jpg.645001/" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><img src="http://i455.photobucket.com/albums/qq279/desertgem/IMG_1958.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p>Especially look at the &quot;7&quot; , the horizontal shows the thickness and the verticals , not as much, but both are thicker than a normal one.</p><p><br /></p><p>I think the lines in the middle of the characters on the 1968S is either an artifact of the lighting or perhaps wear on the die itself. I do not see enough to indicate a DD.&nbsp; A double die of this date can not divide a normal size number or letter into half size each.&nbsp;&nbsp; Jim[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in