The 1882 O/S Morgan Top 100 Vam or Refuted Over Mint Mark

One of the attributions could be incorrect in this specific case. That all hinges on your two different reverse hypothesis proving to be true. I still stand by my suggestion. Maybe the diagnostics you seek exists on the obverse.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

This all makes sense if the dies are always swapped out independently.

Now all we need to do is to find a couple of coins with the same VAM - one in EDS and the other in LDS. Check the opposite sides and see if they show the same die marks or not. If not, then we know the same VAM can have two or more die marriages. It seems that this must have been part of the research of the early pioneers, like Newcomb, who followed the dies through their strike history.

 

That's how it is done. Presumably, for the O/S coins.

 

May a novice get into this conversation? In my Dad's collection of some 370 Morgan Silver Dollars, he has five 1882O/S coins. One is attributed as a 1882O/S VAM-3 EDS by PCGS. The other four coins are in the raw and match up with the VAMWorld web site as VAM-3 and a VAM-4. Looking at the VAMworld site, the VAM-3 EDS matches up with the photo, while the other three VAM-3s match up with the LDS photos. I am confused after reading all of this, which came first? One would guess that with the "flush" S die sets, being beaten down and worn would have produced the thinner S. Is this correct? Sorry for all the following photos.

 

I have three more sets of photos of the VAM-3 LDS and what he marked as a VAM-4 but in my novice eye it maybe a VAM-3. I'll post those upon request. Don't want to take up so much of your time.

 

Don’t worry. Assume these guys are all retired and are looking for someone to help!

(I am now ducking the barrage of bricks being thrown my way!)

(Besides, I retired a couple of weeks ago so I think I am the butt of this joke.)

 

Look at the rest of the coin, not the mint mark, and it'll be easy to tell which came first. Look at die wear, die cracks, polishing, sharpness of fine detal.

 

Congrats on your retirement Ron!

 

Thanks! Going great so far.

Sure, that’s only four weeks today, but no reason to complain. I’ve got a mix of projects, physical (house and garden) and mental (revisiting some subjects I took in college), to keep me excited to get up each day.

 

Why not post a picture of the die break progression? You know of course that IF
they are two entirely different die pairs...

Additionally, as you know, THE ONLY DIE BREAK PROGRESSION THAT PROVES ANYTHING will be on the REVERSE DIES showing that the die break on the "so-called" LDS is more pronounced than on the "so-called" EDS. So far I cannot recall seeing die breaks on the reverse of these coins but you are the Morgan dollar expert.

BTW, I'm still waiting to hear someone disagree about the different mint mark placement I noted above when I looked at the mint mark.

 

If the die pair doesn't change and you see signs of wear on either side, it shows the order in which the coins are made. There are no Benjamin Button dies. I'll try to find some time to dig out some coins and take pictures this weekend.

 

Thanks! Take your time, no rush.

Apparently, the die pair DID CHANGE because the images of the O/S VAM-4 EDS and LDS mintmark positions posted in VAMWORLD ARE DIFFERENT!!

Therefore, I'm not interested in seeing any die progression on the VAM-4 obverse die. The final, absolute proof that the Morgan dollar "experts" knew what they were doing when they claimed that a weak jumble (EDS) inside the "O" became a sharp "S" (LDS) will be demonstrated with a die progression ON THE REVERSE ONLY!

Now, I'm waiting to eat the crow shoved down my pie hole.