Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;gatzdon, post: 266442, member: 8247&quot;]OK, </p><p><br /></p><p>I know it&#039;s common for people to mistake strike doubling for a double die.&nbsp; The mistake is easy to understand as they do look similar.</p><p><br /></p><p>I also keep hearing about how coins with strike doubling are worthless as they are so common, but in all my time of searching halves, I just never find any coins with strike doubling.</p><p><br /></p><p>To date, I&#039;ve found a little over 60 Franklins pulled from circulation.&nbsp; Yesterday, I started putting them in a Whitman when I noticed something on one of them.</p><p><br /></p><p>The Reverse of a 1963D had quite a few of the letters show strong doubling.&nbsp; So of course I do a Google Search and I don&#039;t find any 1963D double die varieties, indicating this is probably just strike doubling.</p><p><br /></p><p>Well, I start looking at all my franklins closer and I find five total 1963D with strike doubling and one 1963D strike tripling?.&nbsp; For having only 60+ Franklins, that&#039;s quite a few coins with strike doubling.</p><p><br /></p><p>My question here is, that while strike doubling was considered common in the past, it would seem that the Mint has eliminated the rate of occurence.&nbsp; Would this actual give rise to value as going forward, strike doubling is going to get much harder to find.[/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