Meet My' New Discovery Piece!

Discussion in 'Error Coins' started by huntsman53, Apr 21, 2009.

  1. huntsman53

    huntsman53 Supporter**

    My new Discovery piece!

    I thought I would share my' new discovery piece which is an 1982-P "Small Date" Copper Lincoln Cent - New Doubled Die Reverse Variety. Note: The extra Column in the field to the left of the left-most Column in the Memorial building.

    I had a big write up about this coin but I am having conflicts between my AOL software and AT&T software and lost everything that I had wrote. Maybe I will try again later but I wanted to get this coin posted before one showed up somewhere else!


    Attached Files:

  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest

    to hide this ad.
  3. TheNoost

    TheNoost huldufolk

    Congrats, can't wait to read the writeup.
  4. KurtS

    KurtS Die variety collector

    Very interesting find--congrats! :thumb:
  5. spock1k

    spock1k King of Hearts

    congrats. but by using new discovery we have a copyright infringement so the coin now actually belongs to me :p

    where did u find it frank?
  6. rockdude

    rockdude Coin Collector

    That looks more like a die gouge than a doubled die. But you no doubt have more experience in this then I, so please explain how I am to believe this is a doubled die. Thanks
  7. jello

    jello Not Expert★NormL®

    Great eye!
  8. foundinrolls

    foundinrolls Roll Searching Enthusiast

    Hi Frank,

    I would also be curious to know how it was determined that it is not a die gouge. It would appear that there would be more areas of doubling on the coin if the spread of the doubling is that large. Is there more on the coin than we see in the pictures?

  9. atrox001

    atrox001 Senior Member

    It looks like a die gouge to me...who attributed this as a doubled die and a new discovery?

    Larry Nienaber
  10. huntsman53

    huntsman53 Supporter**

    I more or less attributed it as a Doubled Die myself! However, Ben took a look at it at the Coin Show in Knoxville in March and did not say it was and did not say it wasn't. Now, I have known Ben for quite awhile and I respect him both as a Variety Researcher and a friend. However, I have found Ben to sometimes show indifference to anyone else's discoveries because he did not make the find! (Sorry Ben but I am sure that you know that you are this way at times!) Ben is not the only Professional Variety Searcher that is this way, there are many others and one of those is Bill Fivaz himself.

    Why is it so hard to consider or half a%$ except that this is a new Doubled Die Variety? Why would you not consider it to be just that when there are many and I mean many other Lincoln Memorial Cents that have been designated as being Doubled Dies with similar doubled Columns and some are even less significant than mine! Why are none of these considered merely to have Die Gouges instead of being Doubled Die Cents? Just check out the links below for similar and lesser Doubled Die Cents.

    I believe 100% that it is whether anyone else does or not! The majority of Die Gouges are ragged, not straight, tilted in comparison to a specific detail and/or not parallel with the Columns. The line (extra Column) on my' coin is not only straight, it is not ragged and it is perfectly parallel to the left-most (last) Column as well as in close proximity to the Column.

  11. spock1k

    spock1k King of Hearts

    u dont need anyones blessings for this (excpt mine ;) if someone is willing to acknowledge it great if not get it published on iur own. i am thinking u should write a book on this nonsense that the hobby faces. GD is the only person i know who doesnt have this nasty habbit at the top ( and he is on the top) all the others are more or less like what u mentioned and it makes me real angry
  12. foundinrolls

    foundinrolls Roll Searching Enthusiast

    The reason is that yours looks like a die gouge and does not exactly match what would be seen on a doubled die if the doubling was spread that far. Look at a 1983 DDR or the newer 1982 DDR that has real knockout doubling.

    There should be more and there isn't. It just doesn't appear to be a doubled die.

    The other problem is that the coins you used as examples are mostly after single squeeze technology was implemented and the doubling is toward the center of the die.

    On 1982 dated coins where multiple hubbings would have been used to create the dies, there would have to be more doubling elsewhere on the reverse for it to be a doubled die.

  13. huntsman53

    huntsman53 Supporter**


    I understand what you are saying but there are many Doubled Die Cents such as several of the 1970-S "DDO" Cents that show nothing more than a slight extra bar above the horizontal bar of the "7" in the Date as well as many more examples that prove differently. Many times, the Dies are repaired thus removing most or all evidence that it was ever doubled. Also, there were probably many more Cents struck using the single squeeze method that are not doubled towards the center such as Class IV Doubled Dies such as the 1994-P "DDR #3" Cent (See link below) which is a result of Off-Set Hub Doubling which shows doubling of several Columns in the Memorial building towards the East and not towards the center. It is quite possible that my' coin is a result of Off-Set Hub Doubling but off-set to the West and any other evidence of doubling was removed from the Die before it's use.

  14. LostDutchman

    LostDutchman Under Staffed & Overly Motivated Supporter

    My comment is this.

    If the other doubling was removed from the die, why would the doubling be left on the spot that is easiest to remove it? All of the other pillar doubling that you posted is on the interior of the design. When polished the design protects the doubling. This doubling hanging off the end would be the first thing that got polished off if that theory was correct IMHO.
  15. coppercoins

    coppercoins certifiably unstable

    I don't see a doubled die. I see a hit or gouge, depending on whether the area is incuse or in relief.

    It's not really a matter of 'belief' or 'opinion' - it either is or it is not. From what I can see in the image it is not for a number of reasons.
  16. foundinrolls

    foundinrolls Roll Searching Enthusiast

    The point though is that on that 1994 cent where the doubling is not at the center of the design, there are several areas of doubling and that would be consistent with a doubled die. Your coin has one mark. Also, a large majority of die gouges are straight and appear as small straight raised areas on the surface of a struck coin.

    I really think that in your earlier post, you are confusing die cracks that are often jagged, with die gouges which are often straight.

    Also, if you get down to the smallest details on coins like the particular 1970 S DDO you mentioned, there is more to it than the upper part of the 7. There is other evidence of thickening of digits in the date.

    To attribute a doubled die , even a new one, there is a combination of factors involved. I have at least a dozen discovery coins that have been attributed by either Potter or Wexler or both and many are in the 1982- 1989 era. I am extremely familiar with what doubled dies look like on coins of that period and this one just doesn't fit.


    PS: I am never one to "poo poo" a new discovery when there is one. I've helped several people with getting their coins attributed. I just don't think by what I've seen on this one that it is more than a die gouge.
  17. bhp3rd

    bhp3rd Die varieties, Gems

    Frank, I did not think it was a doublED die at all but,

    Frank, I did not think it was a doublED die at all but, when folks are already convinced somehow that they have "found something" I don't like to tell them that in fact they have not as it just alienates them. It is much better for them to learn for themselves.
    The others are correct - it either is or is not.
    When we found that 1957-D Washington with the extra "D" in the wreath I sent it to Bordner the next Monday after the show. Why, because I really did think it was something special - I still do and do not agree with Wiles that it is a staple or something - anyone that sees that coin would know why I think it is an extra "D" - that coin will "come back around I guarantee it.
    But Frank, don't take things so personal - when you post a coin and ask for opinions be fully ready to embrace those opinions.
    Copper Coins and Found in Rolls are formative experts in the field and Mr. Fivas is a legend - these guys know there stuff. When you find a coin that you think is a true doublED die get it to the folks that matter for an attribution and then you have something and will be rewarded. Don't let yourself fall into the that trap that "if folks don't agree with me they are against me" - nothing could be further from the truth. There is no special club or special group that if you belong you are in and if your not your out - we all want to find new doubled dies and when we do we must submit ourselves to scrutiny and prove that what we have found is really a die variety worth learning about. It can happen "no other way". We are here to learn about die varieties and questioning everything is the only way to find the truth because nobody knows it all including me and all the others.
    One of the major reasons for my not giving a definitive answer on many of your coins is to give you the oppertunity to learn for yourself and to keep your enthusiasm up - I never would want to dash your hopes prior to investigation.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page