1957D Repunch date?????

Steven · Expert Member

Don't know what this is, any help???? 1957D. Maybe a repunch 7???

Steven

coop · Expert Member

I can't see all of the date, but appears that it is die deteriation caused by Very Late Die State (VLDS). As the die wears, it enlarges the numbers/Letters/Details. Detail disappears and abnormalities appear. So I think it is die Wear causing your example from what I can see.

Bob P · Site Admin

I agree with Coop's assessment, but could you post another picture with it backed out a little bit? I would like to see the rest of the date area.

Steven · Expert Member

I don't see the same effect anywhere else on the numbers and would not have thought much about this but at the upper left corner of the seven it looks like the corner is doulbled and tilted and it appears to match with the angle of what is above the seven. Took about 20 pictures and this is the best I could get.
Thanks
Steven

Bob P · Site Admin

Interesting Steven. Do you think I might be able to have a look at it?

wavysteps2003 · Expert Member

Just a bit of info on what this may be. There was an article recently in ERRORSCOPE that taked about re-punched numerals in the date and this particular die was mentioned as having that possiblity. Along with the 1956-D with tilted 5, possiblity of the 1963-D with the underlying 3 south and a bunch of the 1946 Lincoln cents with a weak 4 are all canidates for having a repunched digit.

Nice find.

WAVYSTEPS2003 aka BJ Neff

Steven · Expert Member

Bob ,
It will be in the mail Monday.
Thanks,
Steven

coppercoins · Site Admin

I would be interested in finding out whether the Mint used any numeral punches to 'repunch' dates in less than completely hubbed dies. I highly doubt it, but it could be a possibility.

It has always been my understanding that the entire design with the exception of the mintmark was hubbed into the dies. This completely alleviates any possibility for a repunched date to occur.

Bob P · Site Admin

Thanks Steven. I will let you know when it gets here, and will post my opinion on it here.

wavysteps2003 · Expert Member

Just talked with John Wexler on this subject for there was a bit of confusion on whether the last two digits were hand punched into the master or just the last digit. He confirmed it was the last two digits. The reason why is that the master die could then be used for a couple of decades instead of just over a ten year or one year period. This practice went out, I believe in the year 1983. Why the mint stopped punching in the last two digits may have been that the master dies were wearing out to fast or the switch to the copper clad over zinc had something to do with it, I am not sure?

One of the biggest indicators of the mint punching in the last two digits of the date is the 1946 Lincoln cent. Take any penny from that year and you will see that the "46" is weak, more so on the "4" than the "6". This led to what I believe was the mint repunching the "4" of the date into some of the working dies. In my first article for ERRORSCOPE, I approached this subject for it is believed that the mint stopped repunching the digits in the date in 1908 with the IHPs. However, there is sufficient evidence, with the 1956-D (tilted 5), the 1957-D (tilted 7),
the doubling on numerous "4"s on both the 1946-S and 1946 and even the possibility of the underlying "3" in the 1963D-1DO-001, that these dies may have repunched digits. As I have pointed out, it would have been easier, after the errant digit had been abraded from the die, to have the engraver punch over the inital error instead of rehubbing the whole die. But, that is just my theory.

You all have a good one and keep searching; the more we find, the more information we will have and a better understanding of just what is going on at the Mints.

Regards,
WAVYSTEPS2003 aka BJ Neff

coop · Expert Member

Another year to add to that list is the 1970 Cents with the class 7 doubled dies on the 70, where the errant digits were removed.
http://www.coppercoins.com/lincoln/diestate.php?date=1970&die_id=1970d1do002&die_state=mds
http://www.coppercoins.com/lincoln/diestate.php?date=1970&die_id=1970d1do003&die_state=eds
http://www.coppercoins.com/lincoln/diestate.php?date=1970&die_id=1970d1do005&die_state=mds
http://www.coppercoins.com/lincoln/diestate.php?date=1970&die_id=1970d1do006&die_state=eds
http://www.coppercoins.com/lincoln/diestate.php?date=1970&die_id=1970s1do013&die_state=eds
With this year we see all three mints had dies that were altered to match other dies for this year. So here is another year to add to the list.

wavysteps2003 · Expert Member

I had completely forgotten about the 1970 series and you are right Coop. If this were the true class V, as some are described, we would see other elements doubled, however, this is not the case. One point that I would like to make though is that since all the extra "bars" (tops of the errant 7 ) are in different places, this does not point to a master die fault, but actually a hubbing fault. It is possible that a tilted hub error was discovered, the last two digits abraded and then rehubbed, still leaving portions of the errant "7". But that is just a guess.

WAVYSTEPS2003