Surprisingly enough it's a really dramatically different reverse that has escaped notice, probably because there are so many other interesting things in the '96 mint set. About 3% (or a little less) of the '96 Denver cents in this set have a finer lettering at the top of the reverse. The differences are significant but are focused on the top of the second "S" in "STATES". This letter lacks a serif at the top and is further from the rim. I'm estimating the surviving population at 30,000 but this presupposes that none were made for circulation or that none were preserved. These appear as PL's so far but the sample is still small.
is there anything published you can cite for this or is it something you discovered? Just wondering. Thanks for sharing either way. Got any pics?
I believe I'm the first to discover it (just yesterday) or at least that no one has been letting on that it exists. These really are pretty dramatic. It an be seen at arms lenght and there's a very high correlation bwetween the most PL issues of the date and being this variety. I'm hoping someone will post a picture before the thread gets very old. I've got everything I need except the ability to use the camera on a coin.
Sam, you really have to post some comparative photographs for a visual on what you're referring to as most folks do not have a "hoard" of 1996 Mint Sets. I looked at the "one" that I have and compared it to the 1995 and 1997. They all looked the same as I just do not know "what" to look for.
Yeah, I know. You really need to ave both in front you to compare. In this case it's not quite as important to have both since the difference is huge. On the "far-S" variety the distance between the top of the S and the rim is four times the width of the top of theletter and on the regular coin it's only the width of the letter from the rim. I'm going to hold out hope someone will post a picture for at least a bit.
I have never heard of any such discovery until now. We will need to see pics from you, instead of waiting for someone else to look through their own coins and try to spot this rare new "variety" for themselves.
I'm not saying that the OPs claim is likely or not likely, but surely posting a picture of someone doing drugs in response to their thread is a little insulting, no? (And also against CT rules?)
I've only got two sets but the second S is a little thinner than the first S. Unfortunately, it appears like the P cent has a similar S. I'm thinking that it just typical. I'm wondering on the way you determined the 3% or less of the population with this thin S. Do you looked at hundreds of them to determine this percentage?
I found a few rolls from mint sets and just "did the math". The sample size is still too small to get a highly accurate number but I'm about 90% confident that originally the %age was between 2.5 and 3%. If your's is just a little thinner then it's not it.
non cents, this kid got you huck, line, and sinker, but kids will play, or as us older would say, some peoples kids
its more about the connotation associated with the image than what is actually depicted in the image. Not everyone who claims to have found a new variety should be immediately discredited by association with the image. @Rick Stachowski you just had one of your own. While I've read enough of your posts to believe you posted that as a kind funny way to tease the OP, and maybe goad him into posting pics of what he's talking about, some (maybe the OP) may be insulted who are unfamiliar with your sense of humor. to the OP, please attempt a pic so we can better see what you mean.