I know there are 1988 cents with the reverse of the '89, but are there any 1989 that have the reverse of a '88? It sure looks like the initials on this 1989 are for a 1988.
It is listed in. Strike it rich! It also says "due to skeptical concerns" it has a much lower premium of 10$ in uncirculated.
Thanks. I assume that it being "skeptical", that it was never authenticated or proven to actually exist. Did the book actually have a picture of it or just a description?
Looking again and researching a little more, it looks more like the RDV-007 'LG" with the squared lower right of the 'G" except it has a wide AM??? I don't think it's even possible to have that, since they didn't make dies in that combination and version 7 wasn't introduced until 1993. I am confused. Maybe it's just PMD or a bad die. Any help would be appreciated.
The 1988 P&D Transitional cents as you already know has the reverse of the 1989 which is attributed as RDV-005 and RDV-006. The Difference between the two are the "FG" Designers Initials. I have been lucky enough to find several of both. The RDV-007 Variety refers to the 1992 Close AM Varity and not the 1988 or the 1989 Reverses. Your 1989 cent may resemble the RDV-007 however the "FG" is the result IMO of the combination of a weak die strike and as (Pickin and Grinin) stated, a later die state or its even possible that the die was partially filled with grease or dirt. Some of the 1988 RDV-006s that I have, the "FG" looks like you are thinking (RDV-007 Reverse) but they are indeed a weak strike so the serifs on the G did not raise and seem to be "Squared" as you stated. One major difference that I've noticed between the 1988 RDV-005 & 006 and the 1992 RDV-007 is that the "FG" on the 88s have a rounded top to the letters and the 92 letters are flat topped like all others after 92.
If you don’t mind me asking, I have found several 1989-D cents, some with RDV-005 and some with RDV-006. Are either of these of significance with the 1989-D?
If I remember correctly this was removed because a weak strike, and die deterioration. Could be a factor in attributing them. I haven't looked lately and can't remember but these were highlighted in either the CPG or the strike it rich.
I've never heard of it . But I did notice, no one talked about the 98-99 proof reverse lincoln cent .
Nothing here either . http://varietyvista.com/01b LC Doubled Dies Vol 2/Memorial Reverse Design Varieties.htm
Here is a much clearer pic of one that I found. 1989 penny Wide AM with the RDV-007 look to the initials on the reverse. Doesn't seem right?
Is this one also? What about the WAM being with a far-away initial? And notice the inside curve of the "G", not flat at the end? Thanks!
Ignore any discussion about "WAM" on these 1988 and 1989 cents, BOTH reverse hub designs have what would be described as Wide AM's. So "WAM" is meaningless in telling the two designs apart.
In researching, the WAM's "initials" is supposed to be "close" to the Memorial. They say that is a better indicator of whether you have a CAM or WAM. But in this case, the initials are "far" from the Memorial with WAM on both. I agree, both are supposed to be WAM, and they are. It's the initials that are wrong. Just trying to figure out which one used the wrong die. Or are they both wrong? I will get more examples of both '88 and '89 to make comparisons. If they declare that there is a transitional mistake on the '88 with the '89 initials, then when we have physical proof of the '89 with the '88 initials, it must be discussed and verified as a variety/error.
Very true. Some older editions of the Cherry Pickers Guide have WAM listed in the verbiage making one think is an attribute when it isn’t, it’s just confusing the issue, which I have raised before to make sure the confusion can be neutralized, if possible. It remains to be seen if the publishers correct this in the next edition…Spark