mint mark?

[ldarrellc]

Md or double there is no other doubling on the coin.





double variety?

[coop]

Machine doubling.

[Bob P]

The second picture is definitely an RPM Darrell. It looks as though it may have both, but there is little doubt with the strength of the split in the lower serif that it is an RPM. The first and third pic both show machine doubling as Coop says.

[ldarrellc]

the middle pic is a 1979D

[rollmeupabe]

It does not look like "97" above the mint mark. Looks more like "96". 1960 maybe?

[Dick]

Darrell, I agree the second is an RPM, with a CW tilt. The first looks like a D/D/D, except there is MD, and maybe an RPM, as well. The third looks like all those I have been looking at today......
I think the date has to be 196x, or maybe 198x.
DIck

[ldarrellc]

actually the third is from a 2003d lincoln cent if the is machine doubling then that would make the 2004D-1DR-003 machine doublling as well.

[Bob P]

Darrell,
You need to look very closely at your 2003D and the one you mention on the site. There are some differences you may not have noticed between the two. The 2004D-1DR-003 is not machine doubling at all. If you look at the areas of doubling, they are more rounded, not flat and shelf like as your is. Granted...it can be very confusing when the doubling on one coin that is actual hub doubling, and the doubling on another happens to be machine doubling but in the same place or ares. You have made great strides in picking out varieties lately. Sometimes it is difficult to determine which is which. That is why we are here. We help each other out the best we can.

[ldarrellc]

okay here is one from the site and one of mine.

[eagames]

#1 = MD
#2 = RPM (but not the dates mentioned)
#3 = MD

So what's the date on the middle RPM?
Can't be 79 (from the looks) or 96 or 97 since there are not RPMs in those years because the mintmarks were not punched in those years so it must be 196X like Dick said

[ldarrellc]

the middle one is a 1979d if i can find it again I will send the pic

[Bob P]

OK Darrell. With you putting both pics up there, it makes it easier to examine and analyze. The pick up point I want to point out is on the top of the planter. Notice how the one from the site appears to be like a football (all rounded and such) sitting on top of the planter. If you look at the pic of your coin ion the same area, you will see that it appears to be scraped onto the top, or depressed into the top rather than smooth and round. It is flat and shelf like to use the popular analogy. You will actually notice the same on the bay floors. Smooth and rounded areas versus those with seemingly sharp edges. I don't quite know how else to explain it, but after examining hundreds of these, I am almost positive that yours is mechanical.

[eagames]

Ones like that are so tough. It can be that one in a million where the strike doubling looks so much like the ddo it seems it must be it. I see what Bob is saying, it looks like a scrape. If I found the listed one I might toss it back as a strike double because it's also a ddo that looks a lot like a strike double.

Sometimes it's only clear if you look at the real ddo and the suspected one side by side. I've had a few look alikes I put in flips with a big ? on it and later found or got the real ddo then I could tell what I had first found was a strike double.

I've also seen the opposite, something I questioned then later realized was the variety after I saw one or a better pic or found a marker to solve it.

[ldarrellc]

Thank you for clearing that up for me.