found this one last night looking for a comparison for the no m 1962. it was in a pile from pocket and roll change to check later for harp or hanging. then i saw something not quite right with the date, but it was hard to spot, as my side lit loupe makes a lot of the dates look doubled. only pics through the loupe show whats really there. not in great shape but still a nice find i think. is this one worth keeping? worth anything more than 1 penny...oops cent.(just to get you started)
The doubling is flat and shelf-like, indicating machine doubling. There are split serifs, but they are sort of under the strike, not like an end split, My opinion is machine doubling, but of course, wait for more opinions.
this one looks exactly like the one i got from fiston in a contest. including the apparent doubling of the stem going to the leaf.
I agree with it being MD. What you should be looking for is in the pic below. It's not mine but one I copied from coppercoins.com site. See how the doubling is the same height as the primary date as opposed to being flat like the one on your coin:
you see a difference between this one and - http://www.cointalk.com/showthread.php?t=128129&p=1021872&highlight=#post1021872 ? (page 7) i dont see it but then again im not as expert as some in here. im looking at the pics and by serifs, i believe you mean a clear sunken line between the two raised areas? if so, then i agree, based on these pics, but i might take another look, maybe try to get better pics. keep in mind this coin is pretty worn, dont know if that makes a difference on whats left to see.
The one fiston posted (doubled 962) is the same as yours. It's MD. Years ago, it was listed by Zoell as being a doubled die but since then it has been determined that it was MD. However, some collectors use Zoell's interpretation even though it is out-dated. Just as in the U.S., the poor man's doubled die is still accepted even though it is only die deterioration.
