Mint Mark Location

[Robert]

I've often wondered why mint mark location (i.e., specific placement of the "S" or "D" on the die) isn't considered a collectible die variety as a DDO or RPM is. Anyone have similar thoughts or a reason why it's not more popular than it is?

I've seen many cents from the 1950s-1960s with a great degree of variance... variance that can easily be seen with the naked eye. To me, that should be by definition be a "significant" die variety but it doesn't seem to be the case.

One would think that the number of coins made by a die with the "D" to the lower left of the "19" in the date would be similar to the number of coins made by a doubled die. And one might think that some MM locations are very common while others are very rare, like certain RPMs are common or rare.

True, some MM locations would be minor varieties so to speak because they're lcoated in about a "normal" position. But then some DDOs are very VERY minor.

It just seems to me to be another logical, valid, and collectible kind of variety. Just curious as to why it's not popular.

[Dick]

Robert, maybe this will answer your questions: For instance, in the 1960D, there are in the area of 1/8th" above the tail of the "9", 14 (so far). 1/8th" below the tail, 27, (so far). 1/4" above, 17, and below, 19, (so far). 3/8th " above, 2, (so far). below, 5, (so far). 1/2" below, 3, (so far). This does not include the EVEN placement.
The distance from the tail to the MM will run from 1/8", to 3/4", (so far).
Hope this makes sense!
Dick

[eagames]

Hey Robert & Dick,

I guess they're of interest to somebody.

Maybe the reason most people ignore them is there wasn't a defined rule that the mint used (that we know of) so they were not errors because they were within the acceptable position. They probably did toss dies that got the MM punched onto the date because we don't see many of them. I have seen some MMs that touch the dates.

In reality the reason minor DDOs aren't high value is they're hard to see and in reality may have been within the acceptable criterea. Who knows if some were noticed but they said it's still usable and acceptable. We still like them because they're minor examples of DDOs (but less value than big ones).

It would be interesting if someone noted MMs far out of position or touching the dates. Maybe it would be a good post topic... ("post your strange mintmark positions")

My favorite goofy MM is the 1952-d d/d/d RPM 15 because it's a normal minor RPM but that 3rd D is below the bust hanging over the edge totaly separated and very for from the mintmark position. If you look close at those coins they also have a thing that looks like another light D on Abes nose (look if you have one). I think they must have been training a new worker on punching mintmarks

I could post some pics if anyone is interested.

[Robert]

Not sure if I follow either of you...

Dick, yes mint mark locations vary greatly for cents made in the 50's - 60's. I was asking why those variations are not considered to be collectible.

EA, Sure post the pics. I think the varied mint mark locations are not "errors" as you say because that implies something going wrong with the minting process. The mint mark location is, to me, a "die variety" because only one die has that mint mark in a given location. True, there may be no "correct', mint-specified MM location but as Dick's data show the MM location varies widely. Mint marks at the "normal" location are analogous to minor DDOs because they're close to normal. A MM way out of position would be like a DDO with significant spread because both are obviously and significantly "wrong".

My view is that some MM locations (after much studying/research) will be found to be more scarce/rare than others, just like some DDOs and RPMs are considered to be more scarce/rare than others. Some coins such as your 1952D with the D way out of position may be considered in the future to be valuable because of the unusual MM location, sort of like why the1955 DDO is so popular: It's an extreme example of that type of variety.

It just seems to me that 1.) MM location should be considered a die variety; 2.) As such some by definition are more rare than others; and, 3.) Therefore MM location should be collectible.

This may be the time to study/collect wandering mint marks. Perhaps in the future they'll gain popularity.

[Jack]

Robert
I my be missing something here, however each Mint Mark applied by hand "Punch" could in theory be in a diefferent location. A collection would be one of each obverse die of the punch. Many would be so close in location that most collectors would not be able to determine which punch they were looking at.
Jack

[wavysteps2003]

Some positional mint marks are collectible, however, the majority are just taken for granted.

Generally, those mint marks that are positioned very close to the date or in some instances, touching the date, do command a small premiun. Another collected mint mark are those that are askewed from the horizontal plan. The more the angle from the horizontal plan, the more it is collectible.

Speaken strictly of Lincoln cents, a mint mark positional collection could be made for the following dates due to the rarity of the working dies used.


1909-S, (I believe that nine different working dies were used, so there would be nine different positions to be obtained)

1946-S, with ball serif mint mark (Trumpet tail mint mark) approximately thirteen different mint mark positions have been found to date.

Other posibilities.

The 1928-S large mint mark: there may have been two or three working dies to have the large mint mark.

The 1941-S large mint mark; there maybe somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 to 30 different working dies with the large S mint mark.

Of course, there are other coin denominations that have scarce or rare mint marks for that year and could fit into positional mint mark collections.

The main reason that you do not hear of the 1909-S being called a mint mark position collection is because it is called a working die collection which is basically the same thing.

(If you are thinking that this could apply to the 1909-S VDB, forget it; only one working die was used, so only one position on the mint mark.)

Correction on that last statement. I had been told that only one working die had been used for one day to produce the 484,000 that were minted. If Chuck says there are actually four working dies that were used, I would be more apt to believe him than my origanl source for tghis information.

In the long run though, it is what the collector finds interesting and wants to add to his or her collection.

BJ Neff

[coop]

In recent years the number of dies (1990-2007) are pretty well the same as the mintmark is part of the hub. Only shifting of the hub is noticable. But previous to 1989 all d & S coins were hand punched. The ones that are common, these dies were in the thousands made by each mint. So we identify certain dies that have RPMs and DDs on them as part of a variety. The miss-location would be a variety, but so far no one has listed them. They are a variety in the sense every coin struck with that die has the same location/miss location touching a number or even on the bust. So no one has numbered them, but I'm sure someone will probably get to it some day as all these are from one die, just as RPMs and DDs are.

[hasfam]

Collecting MM positions or locations is way too ambitious for me, but I did run across a cent with a MM in an odd location a few years ago. It was a late 70's or early 80's coin I think, don't really remember but kept it awhile. When you look at 10's of thousands of coins for 10-15 years somethings can really jump out at you when the coin shows a difference from the normal. I recall this particular MM was way south of the normal position, not just an 1/8" or. You could drive a mack truck between the date and the MM. Never found another like it since. Everyone have a great Memorial weekend and drive safely.
Rock

[coop]

I have also seen one coin that stood out that way. The mintmark was waaaay South. Under the middle of the date, but almost touching the Bust. I made an image of it and now can't find either the coin or the image. But we are probably talking about the same die. Be interesting if someone had one of these. We would both probably say: "Thats it!"

[coppercoins]

There are four known mintmark placements for the 1909S VDB cent, hence four different working dies were used.

The reason mintmark positions aren't considered collectible as such is simply because anything under the date, in front of the vest, and not touching the rim was in the acceptable ballpark, and anyone who has been through a number of coins would know that this ballpark was well played through the years.

[eagames]

Robert,

Here's my favorite mintmark goof.

1952-D it's a D/D and misplaced D with the misplaced D below the bust going off the coin. Known as RPM-15.

It's the easiest RPM to cherry because even without any mag you can see the D below the bust with a naked eye.

These have a nice regular D/D and the misplaced D. They also have a raised area between T-Y from something (die damage?) and something shaped like another D on Abes nose (a gouge or another D?).

Talk about mintmark placement, look at the spread

[Robert]

Coop- I agree.

Eagames- Lots of things going on in that pic!

Chuck- I defer to your knowledge/experience but when you say

[eagames]

Robert,

Like CD said the MM should be in front of the vest, on this one they didn't even get it in the ball park plus it has 2 Ds in the correct area already. Having the misplaced D below the bust does add to this coin being collectable, they sell for more than most RPMs. I've seen graded ones of these go for over $100 but haven't seen something with only a strange placed single mintmark go for a premium.

Raw example on ebay:

http://cgi.ebay.com/1952-D-WRPM-016-RPM-15-BU-LINC-CENT-D-BELOW-BUST_W0QQitemZ130107716499QQihZ003QQcategoryZ524QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem

[Dick]

BJ, by your statement:

[eagames]

It means tilted/rotated