Overlooked 64' Kennedy half

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

It hasn't yet surfaced because it doesn't exist. All Denver did was the coining, they didn't make these hubs. Nuances in the sizes and shapes on the coins don't change that fact. There's no such coin as a 1964-D "No D." There's a 1922-D "No D," but that's a cent, not a half. We know about it because Denver was the only Mint that minted 1922 cents. Here you're maintaining Denver was mistakenly sent a master die that was hubbed for Philadelphia. That could well have happened. But that doesn't prove it happened anymore than it proves it happened in any other year on any other series of coin. By your rationale, there are 2016-D "No D" cents out there, too. Why? Same rationale, it's possible.

It's gnawing at you. Do yourself a favor. Send it in, see if they'll verify it, get it resolved, once and for all. Then get some sleep, you sound like you could use it.

 

FWIW, there's the only way something like this happens. And it's no big deal...

 

You do understand that the mm was put on the working dies by hand as the last step of the process. If you're suggesting that the mint used a different hub for each mint and kept the manufacturing process separate, there should be records of it in the mint reports.

In order to support a claim like this, doing some research is essential. Many of the mint records are located on the Newman Numismatic Portal. I would suggest spending some time searching there. Measurement data isn't enough. There are too many variables that can affect the letters like die wear, striking pressure, set up distance between dies, planchet thickness for a start. All of these could affect how the metal flows when the coin is struck.

BTW: A TPG isn't going to take your word that the mint was using a production process that's currently unknown, AND you just happen to have an new error caused by that unknown process, especially when there is a simple explanation (Philly mint). You're going to need some documentation to get it authenticated.