Vote on what kind of doubling this is 1926 s & 1969 s pennies

What is more confusing than doubling ? There is machine doubling, worn die doubling, and no matter how often we read and reread about these types of errors it never sticks. Please vote on these two coins as to the type of doubling you see and share the rule of thumb you use to relent and let a coin go on by knowing it is not doubled die and only machined.
If you have photos please share as examples.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Repunched dates if not MMD.

 

Machine doubling

 

Dates I am in agreeing . But mint marks with better photos would Help to see if Rpm or something other.

 

Re-punched dates if not MMD ? Being as new as you are old to this wonder we call cherry pickin I confess MMD is over my head. The dates repunched o.k. is this like in the case of the 1960 small over large repunched ? My other ponder is in the legend at trust ? A lot of it looks machine doubled to me except at the S in truSt. I attached a doubled die as an example as it clearly shows an enlarging of the letters and rounded serifs all of it raised and not flat like it slide.

 

I must beg off the Boss called in the middle of this and its off to the salt mines for me. I will zero in on the mint marks asap and post them.
Basically these two pennies are machine doubled or repunched dates which I confess I will need to learn more about. An better photos of the mint marks will help. I will say I seen nothing on them but perhaps better eyes and I have a few tubes of RPMs I will share a few as well so you can see I realize this part of coin errors. I guess I am hung up on doubling or is doubled the better word. They can co-exist and it was just this I thought was the case here. Care to comment on the best way to think about repunched verses doubled ?

 

Notice the top of the 'S' in trust where the 'doubling' appears. The 'S' is about 1/2 as thick as it should be ~because the MD damaged that side of the letter after it was made on the planchet. You can see similar with the 'R and T'. A true Doubled die will make the area look fatter/thicker than normal. The 1960 small date over large date date is a design doubled die, not a repunch. The 1942/1 dimes and 1943/2 jeffersons are not repunches of date, they are design Doubled dies ( type 3), 2 different hubbing dies from different years used.

The S mm are machine doubled also.

Dates stopped being repunched with the Indian Head cent.

 

And of course all of this makes perfect sense to you Smile I am trying to grasp something just out of my reach. The example of a doubled die I shared on the 1888-p Morgan has all you say for a true doubled die. the dies themselves have already in them the doubling which is transferred to the blank planchet But in the case of these two pennies the 1926 & 1969 the dies had no doubling in them on them but they were made to strike the planchet more than once or perhaps were worn enough to cause this effect we see as doubling but not doubled die. if this is correct or at least heading in that direction please verify. Now if I understand correctly the 1960 was a blank planchet struck with one die then restruck a second time using a different die and this is a designed doubling verses a die that has a doubled image punched into its self. But in the case of the two pennies I shared this was the same die that went down on these coins more than once. If I have this right I can progress in my reasoning so please take a minute and verify my understanding is right. Thanks p.s. you learned what you know somewhere...could I too not study from the source ?

 

md

 

Although that can occur ( double strike) it is very uncommon and appears different. MD most often occurs when the working die strikes the planchet and is moved in one or more direction before the die moves back up, or before it can withdraw perfectly vertically ( due to movement) and so the metal of the struck coin is sheared off or flattened in a direction. Both make the remaining image smaller in thickness and one part flattened, flatter, smeared/sheared compared to the normal portion of the letter or device.

No, the doubling ( doubled die) occurred when a hub die used to make the working ( striking ) die was pressed first with type 1 design . The working die is then softened to take a second impression from the hub die ( normal until the mint started 'single squeeze' hubbing. Then the working die was accidently pressed with a different hub ( design 2) so the working hub now is the doubled die and is used to strike the planchets making doubled die ( type 3) coins.

 

I thank you it is starting to come clear. I wonder if you with all this wonderful be it surely hard earned knowledge would care to speak on a 1888-p Morgan ? After some serious brain strain I was able to identify the errors as the VAM 12 a can't with any certainty say which hubs. Really wasn't to hard once I had a coin to compare it to, then came the rub, in the massive amounts of die clashing that makes up the VAM 12 a I found more. And before I even consider bothering Mr. Allen about a new possible VAM I want to ask others who know things I will one day. As you face the reverse of this coin the right wing across from the e in America there is the MD but do you see what looks like a small I with out serifs ? Then under in God we trust just above the MD on top of the eagles head there are letters. I don't fool myself with super zoom, if I can not see it under my hastings 7x it may be interesting but I know it mans little. these photos are not under super zoom and in fact it seems clearer just under a 7x. I hope you will believe I matched every part to the known VAM 12 a and thus no need to bomb you with photos. If you have soft ware that would let you enlarge a full shot I can send you obv & reverse photos ? I find I learn better when I have a coin with the example on it in front of me.
I worked a lot of hours today and have a 12 hour day coming tomorrow but if you are willing to take a little time on me I will pass it on to others as you already have me. Ron aka rustywrenches. And again thanks really.....

 

Vote Wheat+LMC
Now Morgan Dollar???
1969-S LMC could be this Re-punched Mint mark,but post mint damage could also not be ruled out but here the link for 1969-S

http://coppercoins.com/lincoln/diestate.php?date=1969&die_id=1969s1mm004&die_state=mds

 

If there is some silent rule about only one coin yak at a time per post let it be known and save all that free sarcasm for some one who gives a verb about ya. Why is it you who act like you learned all this by finding a book no one eles has, under a rock, act so lame about what little you do know ? Do your jello self a real favor and miss me from now on or huff and puff and act all tough from the safety of your anonymity....I will learn what I seek to know and won't have to listen to some JELLO brained lame run his mouth on the sly. I came I saw I ran verb all you geeks