I think these will be an improvement. It's still not as obvious as it is when I hold it in my hand, but . . . better, anyway. So, I don't think it's an aged, battered thing - the "double" on the date really looks like a 1, a 9, a 6, a 9 underneath the real date. And an 'S' under the real 'S'. Also, there is the double underneath the bust and also underneath the nose. 1) Is machine doubling common? Does it have value? 2) How come the mint mark AND the date and lincoln's image all have doubling? I thought that the mint mark was punched separately from everything else. Thanks VERY MUCH for your responses. It's really helpful, and so great to have people to ask!
All that is machine doubling. The doubled image results from mechanical issues during the striking of the coin, such as the coin shifting during striking, or the die itself being jarred out of position as a result of vibration or improper coin press maintenance. Mechanical, machine, and strike doubling are all considered to be forms of damage, and are therefore not collectible as an error coin.
Much better photos! Yes the mintmark was added separately that year and that is one reason why it points to MD. If the date was doubled , but not the mint mark, that would indicate more a true doubled die, as the doubling was on the coin die proper BEFORE the mintmark was struck into the die. Since all is doubled, that would have to be both a double die and a Repunched Mint Mark ( RPM), which seldom happens. To see one that is both a DDO and a RPM check this one. I love this coin. http://www.coppercoins.com/lincoln/diestate.php?date=1960&die_id=1960d1do001&die_state=mds Jim
LOL..Not laughing at you or your question at all but I must agree MD. I've been quite active lately with the MD and this forum is so full of experience they have helped me immensley. Keep looking and it will happen. Happy searching and good luck.
The give away is the MM you could telll it;s machine doubling now and i think there;s a a little damage mixed in there to. by the bad nicks on the face of Lincoln Rockdude a simple explanation caused from a loose die Alien JAZEC
Yes the mint-mark is the key to ejection or mechanical, Yes the mint-mark is the key to ejection or mechanical doubling determination on your coin. We know, as you have stated, the mint-mark was added later so the doubling had to occur after that - the only thing that comes after that is the striking of the coins - strike doubling, mechanical doubling etc. With that please don't jump to the conclusion that some folks do and say it's a double strike - it is not, it is more of a continuing (or flopping of) a single strike. Please see my recent post doublEd die for new persons.
mspenny, To answer question #1. Yes, Machine Doubling was fairly common up until the Mints went to the "Single Squeeze Method" implemented (I think) in the early 2000's! And yes, generally Machine Doubled coins have some value over non-Machine Doubled coins due to some folks that collect or just want to own one. However, some Machine Doubled coins for specific dates and MM's can bring significant values over their non-Machine Doubled counterparts. These are usually associated with known Doubled Dies such as the 1969-S, the 1955-P, the 1970-S, the 1971-S, the 1972-P, the 1983-P and some others. Since some Collectors cannot afford a true Doubled Die specimen for certain dates and MM's, they will sometimes settle for a Machine Doubled specimen. Also, there are many Seller's on eBay and elsewhere that will promote and offer for sale, these Machine Doubled coins as Double Die (note no "d" on the end of Double) coins for a specific date and MM and some of these such as BU Red specimens of the 1969-S Lincoln Cent with only Machine Doubling, can fetch prices anywhere from a few dollars to well over $100 depending how strong the Machine Doubling is and how well the Seller promotes (talks up the doubling) the coin. Frank
Frank you confused me??? Frank your throwing me here - single squeeze quadruple squeeze really has nothing to do with a mechancially doubled coins does it?
Ben, You must have mis-read my post! I was merely stating that Machine, Strike or Mechanically Doubled coins were fairly common up until the Mints went to the new Minting Process (Single Squeeze method). Frank
Still don't see any connection? Still don't see any connection? I'm still a little baffled by your comment - I see no connection to the two. It is true that during certain years we saw a plethora of machine doubled coins, dates that come to mind of course are 1968 thru 1974, most all wheat years but what has one process, (single squeeze) have to do with any of it. We see some less mechanically doubled coins recently than we used to but I see no correlation between the two processes. If there are any fewer mechanically doubled coins nowadays it is most likely the result of better tecknowlegy in weeding out any and all errors as they (the mint) are sure much better at it. Sure they may have found better ways to improve the ways luggs on the presses stay tightened and that might coincide with the single squeeze process but it is not because of it. Good to talk with you today come down and see me soon.
Yeah, my bad! I really meant that since the Mints began using newer, upgraded equipment, the amount of Machine Doubled coins that come out of the Mints has dropped off significantly. I confused the newer, upgraded minting equipment with the new (since early 2000's) process of making the Working Dies, Master Hub Dies and Working Dies. Sorry for the confusion! Frank
1969s cent nice pictures and nice coin is the VDB doubled? i hvve a 1969s with double VDB have you ever seen one of those
