Another 1999D DDR?

[Steven]

I would think by the discussions I have read that this 1999D should qualify as a DDR due to the length of the doubling. Thought I would ask to be sure.

[Bob P]

I agree Steven. It is listable. We are finding out there are literally hundreds of these varieties out there. Now I am beginning to wonder if we have opened up a can of worms with these.
When it comes time to add more of these to the site, the criteria will be spelled out specifically. Some people are going to argue that the coin they have should be included on the site, where Chcuk or I decide it shouldn't. We aren't going to make everyone happy, but on the other hand, I don't want to start putting 200 of these on the site. The same holds true for the wavy step dies. I received BJs full library of coins (over 200 I think), and determined that only 33 or so were strong enough to be put on the site. We will probably do the same thing with the bars.

[Steven]

I have found dozens with doubling similar to this one but most are not as prominant the same with a lot of RPM's. They show doubling but I am sure that most of them will never be listed. I keep them anyway never know when somethings may change.
Thanks,
Steven

[coop]

Its better to be safe than sorry. So what if you save a thousand of them, you've only got $10 tied up. And if they take off, you would get more than face price for them.

[foundinrolls]

Hi All,
Help me out here. Has anyone determined if these are some anomaly in the dies? Can they be die chips that occur as a die is being used? It seems possible that if a slight piece of the edge of a column on a die shatters and chips off that it would be possible for a coin struck with one of those dies would have a chip in the same place on every coin struck.

You might also be able to track a progression of the growth of the chip on some pieces.

I am just learning about these and wondering whether or not I should be holding on to them. What is the consensus of opinion here as to the cause of these.

Thanks,
Bill

[Bob P]

Bill,
There has been cases of die chips and gouges, but those are actually pretty easy to distinguish. We assume that these are caused when the slightly misaligned die pops or snaps into place under pressure of the hub. Since the center of the die is the first place to touch the hub, that is why this is usually confined to this area.
This is called a class 9 'Shifted Hub Doubling" and this class has been adopted by most numismatic entities. On some of them you will also find doubled knees etc. They are worth searching for, and as you find them, you can begin to tell that the aren't chips...expecially when there is associated doubling on or near the statue.

[Earwig]

Im new to this post 2001 double die thing thats been goin on. Are You also sayin that there have been rpm's after 1989 on lincoln cents. Cuz i havent looked at all just searched my first post 2001 roll it bein a 2004D an nothin but ill keep searchin
Eric

[coop]

Eric: So far nothing has been noted yet. There are cases where die on the mintmark has worn or turned because of machine doubling. But because the mintmark is now part of the setup of the die, nothing special noted.... well yet anyway. You just don't know what will turn up tommorow. It was thoughed that doubled dies couldn't happen, but know we know they still can.

[Steven]

Eric,
My earlier comment on the RPM's were about any MM for any year that the split serif's which are very minor are still DBL MM's but due to them being so minor they would not make it to a variety list. However I keep them anyway.

Steven

[Bob P]

There can not be any RPMs after 1989. The mintmarks were not punched into the dies after that year. Should there be hub doubling on the mintmark area of any coin post 1989, then the coin would be considered a doubled die. 1995D-1DO-003 is a prime example of this.
As far as years prior to 1990 and RPMs with split serifs on the mintmarks, there are literally hundreds that are just plain too minor to list. That's one of the reasons why Chuck and I have to make a determination on what we put on the site. Not only are minor split serifs numerous, they are difficult to photograph, and sure makes it difficult to attribute...for both us and those using the site to do their own attributions.

[Earwig]

Thats what i thought was just checkin to make sure i didnt miss somethin

Eric

[coop]

Good point though Eric, as future readers of this thread will now know that answer. So no questions are not un-noticed here.

[foundinrolls]

Thanks,

Ok, I knew the theory and the class of doubled die. If I am correct, It's the same class as the 1997 Doubled ear cent. I just wasn't sure of the status on the ones with slight sections of what seems to be the columns.
Thanks Again,
Bill

[coop]

A thought just came to me. (Sorry guys, my mind is always running about coins) If the bar Cent was caused by a chipping of the die (Which I feel it isn't) then why do we not see it on other bays if it is chippingflaking of the dies. I've never seen one yet other than on the center bay. Food for thought...

[Bob P]

Well Coop, to be perfectly honest with you, I had never thought of it as chipping of the die. The general consensus has always been that the die is snapping into place during the hubbing process. As far as it being the same class as the 1997 doubled ear...it should be. I do not believe CONECA has signed onto the Class 9 bandwagon. Most recognized authorities have.
CONECA lists all of their doubled dies after the single squeeze methos was started as class 8 and class 4 + 8. This can not be accurate as those classes of doubled dies happen during the multiple hubbings of dies. Anyway, we will stick with what we have. It works for us.