Help with doubling

Hi,
I have yet to see a coin yet, especially on details this small, regardless of the depth of the detail that shows clear separations such as the ones I pointed out on anything but a coin with some die doubling.
Since these coins, the 2003 and 2005 Proof Sacs, have doubling this clear on predominantly the designer's initials, the coins are likely ClassV (pivoted hub doubling) doubled dies.
There is a long explanation as to how these Doubled Dies occur. Essentially, to make a long story short, doubling is evident opposite a pivot point near the edge of the coin opposite the doubling. I know, clear as mud and sounds like double talk.

This form of doubling is caused when the die after its initial impression is mis-aligned with the hub a second time in a fan shape direction. The pivot point will usually be near the rim, and the doubling will be strongest opposite the pivot point. A good example of this doubling is the 1917 Lincoln cent doubled die obverse.

The images on both these coins show a strong separation.

If it was mechanical doubling on details that small, the metal would just be pushed around to such an extent that those depressions between the designer's initials would be non-existent.

I am having a hard time being convinced, after having seen hundreds (maybe thousands) of doubled die coins that these coins are mechanically doubled.

I really wish I could see these coins first hand

Thanks,
Bill

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Hi Bill...this is one of the strangest things I've ever seen. Here is another photo of my dollar... the photo looks like die doubling to me also, but when you look at the coin it is obviously mechanical. There is something strange about low relief photos. Send me your address and I will send you the dollar to look at, and you can see what I am talking about.

Larry Nienaber

 

Hi Larry,
I certainly respect what you are saying. You've got a ton of experience.
Let me do this, Let me look through a ton of proof sacs at the next coin show I go to. I think I may be able to come across one that I can see this detail on. If I can't I'll take you up on thisoffer to mail it to me for a look see.
It sure is a weird one in my book
Have Fun,
Bill

 

In answer to your question, Larry, the close up photos I've posted ARE under a scope. However, my little scope only goes to 80x. Sorry it took so long to get back to you on this.. family emergency took preference.

 

Mary...You sure started a very interesting post, lets us know if you ever find out what type of doubling you have on the designer's initals on your dollar.

Larry Nienaber

 

Bill...what is your opinion reguarding the doubling on the initials for the dollar I sent you? Did you ever see Marys dollar? Mary...did you ever send yours to anyone? My opinion is mechanical doubling.

Thanks,
Larry Nienaber

 

Yes, Larry. I sent the coin to Bill and he's looking at both yours and mine. I'm waiting to hear what his opinion is. He said he was having a hard time because it's not just the initials that appear doubled. I'll let you know as soon as I do. I guess we're taxing his brain on this one. :smile

 

Hi Mary...he shouldn't be having any problems with this, at least with the one I sent to him, all of the doubling on the coin is mechanical. What I asked him to do was photograph the initials, which are low relief, and see if the photo turns out to look like (high relief) die doubling. This still blows my mind.

Larry Nienaber

 

I think that some of the doubling on the Sacagawea's is very deceiving! I have a 2002-S Sacagawea that is definitely a Doubled Die but also has doubling which appears to be Machine Doubling although it may or may not be Machine Doubling. The coin has strong Doubled Die doubling on "LIBERTY". However, it has lesser doubling on "IN GOD WE TRUST", the DATE, Designer's Initials and on Sacagawea and her baby which appears closer in appearance to Machine Doubling but is more rounded than flat and only about half the height or depth (whichever you prefer) of the other Lettering or details. I am currently at work and haven't checked the coin for uneven thickness but believe that uneven planchet thickness may account for the difference in the height or depth of the doubling and they (the Mint Workers) probably adjust the strike depth of the Dies between strikes.

Oh I forgot! Yes, my coin has been checked by several longtime and qualified Coin Dealers which deal in Error coins!


Frank

 

After pulling out a dollar of my own and discovering this pair of initials as incuse, I have to agree with atrox001 that this is mechanical and the photo is an illusion.

 

Hi All,
After doing some research and checking with a few people I made a discovery. Looking at these under 30X magnification does reveal that this is a type of mechanical doubling. As nicely separated as the images are. It is a very unusual type of mechanical doubling taking on the look that it dioes because the lettering is, indeed , incuse.
Have Fun,
Bill

 

Frank...the chances of your dollar having die doubling would be very remote. Show us some photos, especally the LIBERTY.

Larry Nienaber

 

The fact that the initials show clear separation is conclusive that it is mechanical doubling and not die doubling. The key is that the initials are incuse on the coin. Since they are incuse they are formed by a raised feature on the die and when the die shifts it creates (punches) a second seperated image into the coin. (Just as happens to a die during the creation of a doubled die.)

If it was caused by hub doubling, think about what would happen to the initials in the die during the hubbing. During the first hubbing the die blank would fill the void in the hub to create the RAISED initials on the die. Then when the second, offset, hubbing takes place the raised initials on the die would not fit back into the void in the hub and would instead be FLATTENED out by the hub during the second squeeze. The result would be a doubled die with ONE raised set of initials (possibly wth areas of higher relief where the two images overlapped) and one set of flattened distorted initials (if they even appeared at all) where they did not overlap. A coin struck from such a doubled die would NOT show the raised seperated doubled image that we are used to associating with a hub doubled die.

 

Hi Conder101,
That is also what I determined . What has a great potential to be confusing and the reason I had an interesting time with this one is that often on a mechanically doubled coin, raised lettering is damaged and you can see scrapes and such.
On these initials which are incuse on the coin and therefore raised on the die, you might expect to see some damage or scraping or obliteration of the high points between the doubled initials on the coin as the chatter of the die should still cause some damage to be visible on the coin.
If the coins were actually die doubled, even the incused initials on the coin would look the same as they do on these coins.
I had to look with 30X before I could see the scraping and minor movement of metal around the initials to determine that it was die chatter or a slight hop of the die when the coin was struck.
This type of doubling on this type of lettering is extremely interesting
Have Fun,
Bill

 

Conder101, I don't total agree with you when you say "The fact that the initals show clear seperation is conclusive that it is mechanical doubling and not die doubling", what about Class I, examples 55 or 69 DDO Lincoln cents. I do realize Class I doubling is not very likely with the new single squeeze method of producing dies.

If you look at the initials on this dollar, it is obvious that the doubling is from mechanical means, "strike doubling will give the appearance that metal has been moved, and have a shiny appearance" as described by J.T. Stanton. The point I was trying to add to this post is how strange it is that when the low relief initals are photographed the photo appears as high relief. You have to admit that the photos of the initials in mine and Marys post looks like posible die doubling.

Larry Nienaber

 

Reread my explaination of what would happen to the initials on the die if it was hub doubled. It holds true for offset hub doubling or class one rotated hub doubling. The second hubbing would crush the raised initials from the first hubbing and the resultant coin would only show one set of initials not two. If there was a trace of the first set of initials they would be flattened and distorted.

J T Staton's description of what mechanical doubling looks like is correct for RAISED features on the coin. But the initials on the Sac dollar are not raised, they are incused, and on incused features mechanical doubling acts the same as a hub does when it creates a doubled die, punching two images into the coin.

 

At this point, I would like to thank each of you for your knowledge and insight on this coin. My special thanks to you, Bill, for taking the time to examine the coin in person.

I'm enjoying the bantering between the experts because from it I can do nothing but learn. Looking at the number of people who have read these posts, I'm not alone. There are obviously many readers trying to find the reasoning behind this, so please, continue. And, again, thank you for information you're providing to all.

 

Larry,

I can't get the pictures to post to the forum! I tried about 8 times with no luck. I think that the web host site is having problems because I could not get in earlier.


Frank

 

Pictures of 2002-S Sacagawea DDO Proof Dollar!

Hey Folks,

I have posted some pictures of my 2002-S Sacagawea DDO Proof Dollar! I am still having trouble getting decent, in focus pictures but I hope you can see what I mean about the doubling! More pictures will follow in a additional postings.


Frank