Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;foundinrolls, post: 103228, member: 4350&quot;]Hi,</p><p>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. </p><p>Since these coins, the 2003 and 2005 Proof Sacs, have doubling this clear on predominantly the designer&#039;s initials, the coins are likely&nbsp; ClassV (pivoted hub doubling) doubled dies. </p><p>There is a long explanation as to how these Doubled Dies occur.&nbsp; Essentially, to make a long story short,&nbsp; doubling is evident opposite a pivot point near the edge of the coin opposite the doubling.&nbsp; I know, clear as mud and sounds like double talk. </p><p><br /></p><p>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. </p><p><br /></p><p>The images on both these coins show a strong separation. </p><p><br /></p><p>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&#039;s initials would be non-existent.</p><p><br /></p><p>I am having a hard time being convinced, after having seen hundreds (maybe thousands) of doubled die coins that these coins are mechanically doubled. </p><p><br /></p><p>I really wish I could see these coins first hand <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie1" alt=":)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p>Thanks,</p><p>Bill[/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