Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;rustywrenches, post: 1889389, member: 42938&quot;]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 &amp; 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 ?[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in