Is this cent a 1973-S real doubled die obverse?

Discussion in 'Error Coins' started by T-roy W, Dec 7, 2018.

  1. T-roy W

    T-roy W New Member

    Hello all,
    I am not very familiar with doubled die errors in general but I understand the difference between machine doubling and true doubled dies.

    Could someone help me out with a 1973-s cent that under a microscope looks to me like a real doubled die and not machine doubled.

    If it is real, does it have any value over the couple cents and Unc. is worth.


    Attached Files:

  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest

    to hide this ad.
  3. paddyman98

    paddyman98 No Common Cents! Supporter

    The date might be DDD - Die Deterioration Doubling..
    The Mint Mark could be a RPM
    Just my opinion.

    @Rick Stachowski :watching:
    He can take a look and give some input.
    Rick Stachowski likes this.
  4. Rick Stachowski

    Rick Stachowski Well-Known Member

    I checked the sites and couldn't match, or find anything .....
  5. Definitely appears something is going on, I am no expert but just here to admire what you may have discovered!
  6. T-roy W

    T-roy W New Member

    Thanks everyone!
    Yes I looked for an example it online but could not find any.
    A few years ago I bought a bunch of uncirculated rolls as a lot with dates ranging from 1957 thru 1975. Many of these rolls appeared to be original bank wrapped and unsearched. After finding this website, I decided to start searching them. I am only about half way through searching this roll but I am hoping it gives me some more treats.
    My 1957 roll produced 2 BIE cents with a filled 9 & 5 in the date. 7 other cents from that roll had only the 5 & 9 filled date.

    I still have a 1958 and 1959, and a bunch of 1960's rolls to go through including a couple 1960-D LD's

    here is a picture of each 1957 BIE cent. Sorry I can't post the whole picture at this time, I am using a laboratory microscope connected to a monitor to do my searching and the camera attached to the microscope doesn't have a wide enough range of view to take a full picture of the cents.

    One roll of 1960-D produced what looks like over dates and mint mark but they don't look like anything I have seen online.

    Thanks again!

    Attached Files:

  7. Pickin and Grinin

    Pickin and Grinin Well-Known Member

    On the 73S the doubling on the date is the same as the MM. Being that the MM was punched into the Die by hand. The MM wouldn't show the same as any other device on the coin if it was a DDO. This is Mechanical doubling in my opinion. Same look on both.
  8. Pickin and Grinin

    Pickin and Grinin Well-Known Member

    T-roy W likes this.
  9. enamel7

    enamel7 Junior Member

    Md for sure!
    T-roy W likes this.
  10. V. Kurt Bellman

    V. Kurt Bellman Yes, I'm blunt! Get over your "feeeeelings".

    Yes, this. In this era, a mintmark that exhibits the same "doubling" as the rest of the coin virtually SCREAMS "machine doubling".

    Still trying to understand the doubling search mania, still not getting it. It's like some alien spaceship came down and decreed, "THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS IN COINS IS FINDING DOUBLED ONES", crawled back inside his craft, and flew off. I must've been in the men's room and missed it.
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2018
  11. Pickin and Grinin

    Pickin and Grinin Well-Known Member

    I was a victim of the "strike it rich" era. And devoted way to much of my life to finding the next BIG ONE. Luckily condition became my interest. When grading the coin was more important than finding a Doubled Die, it became more evident that my time was better spent looking at coins that were bright and lustrous. AU or better unless the date was known for a variety.
    Most of these folks don't realize that if they new how to grade, at least remotely close. The coins they find aren't worth the time and effort.
    Study, Study, Study.
  12. V. Kurt Bellman

    V. Kurt Bellman Yes, I'm blunt! Get over your "feeeeelings".

    I heard that! Thing is, I'm so old I was already irretrievably cynical before the first "Strike It Rich.." book ever hit the shelves. I never was bitten by that bug. Now I "spray for it" with good old nasty DDT.

    Here's the way I read "Strike It Rich..." books. I read one sentence, mutter "Gimme a stinkin' break" to myself, read another sentence, roll my eyes, rinse, repeat.
    Pickin and Grinin and Redleg21 like this.
  13. SlipperySocks

    SlipperySocks Well-Known Member

    The idea of finding something valuable without having to spend a lot and possibly selling it for thousands has lured a lot of new ppl into coins, I myself included. But I am evolving from that also so, say what you will but that book is responsible for creating a lot of newcomers to collecting. Many will come and go once they realize they are not getting rich quick but there are some of us that get hooked for the long haul.
  14. V. Kurt Bellman

    V. Kurt Bellman Yes, I'm blunt! Get over your "feeeeelings".

    I once paid $999 for a set from the mint, immediately sold off (at melt) the four gold coins, and had a four-figure 1995-W ASE proof left. Does that count?
  15. coinquest1961

    coinquest1961 Active Member

  16. BooksB4Coins

    BooksB4Coins Newbieus Sempiterna

    And there are many, many others who've walked away in utter disgust wanting absolutely nothing to do with a hobby that embraces such misleading BS, especially from such a widely respected authority. It may give a warm fuzzy to focus only on positives, but the negatives can be even more telling and important, particularly in a hobby already long suffering from a bad reputation.

    As for the book itself and with the understanding this may have changed with newer editions, it's complete garbage that does not provide nearly enough information to properly attribute many of the referenced varieties, especially for its target audience. While there's a number of coin books not worth the paper they're printed on, this is arguably one of the worst and is responsible for immense damage to this niche area of the hobby. One can only hope the compensation Mr. Potter has received was worth it.
  17. SlipperySocks

    SlipperySocks Well-Known Member

    Wow, you really don't like the book. Lol. Being new to the Hobby myself, with this book as the introduction, I just do not see the harm in it that you do but I do not have nearly the time into the hobby as you either. Personally, I did not feel misled by the book at all(3rd edit.), in fact I still use it in conjunction with the CPG. What is misleading is some of the utube videos and the way they make it seem so easy to find highly valuable errors.
  18. SilverDollar2017

    SilverDollar2017 Morgan dollars

    A lot of the YouTube videos and books are quite misleading about errors and varieties.

    (For the record - I actually became interested in the hobby with classic coins - not modern coins. But I like both. :p)
  19. desertgem

    desertgem MODERATOR Senior Errer Collecktor Moderator

    T-roy, it was relatively common. Here are mine. SF had shakey machines.


    All MD,
    T-roy W and Pickin and Grinin like this.
  20. Pickin and Grinin

    Pickin and Grinin Well-Known Member

    Nice sharp photo of that MM Jim.
  21. Pickin and Grinin

    Pickin and Grinin Well-Known Member

    You tube picked up where the fourth edition left off.
    It is our duty to show them a different direction, send them towards the quality before the attribute. That is how they were first seen, and the reason this end of the numismatic world began.

    Those are nice looking photos @T-roy W
    The chip you are seeing in the hook of the six is actually a die marker for a small date.
    From Variety Vista scroll down to 60 D small date. LC Doubled Dies Vol 2/Obverse Design Varieties.htm
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page