1986D??

[Steven]

Any Idea which die this may be??
Thanks Steven

[aballein]

looks similar to 1986D-1MM-014 to me...maybe not i dont know. could also be 1986D-1MM-003 or 007-009..no pics but they are listed at CONECA as being a west shift

[Dick]

Aaron, and Steven, Hi, I was looking at the same thing, this evening, and went to CONECA, but they only give text info. Is there any way to obtain the markers, like we use, to identify their data? I have a lot of photos of MM's that I printed from their site, and tried to tie some of them to "spme of mine", but to no avail. mine have long since gone into flips, and are among the "Hidden Hordes". I can match the OBV in most cases, but the markers on the REV, many times don't exist, so all I do is identify the OBV, and put a big "?" on it. Any ideas?
Dick

[Bob P]

Well, it's definitely an RPM, and a lot of you now understand why the CONECA list is useless. If you say D/D West, the combinations of that direction and the strength of the spread can be endless. Cross references on coppercoins to other variety systems are made only if we are convinced they are the same die. At times, we can not make that determination, so we assign our own number without cross references. In this case, I don't know which variety it is. If I added it to our site, I would give it its own number.

[Steven]

Bob,
I don't recall anyone asking before but what are those listed that do not have photos. Would they be reserved for some varieties that are cross referenced but unavailable for photos as yet??
Steven

[Bob P]

Steven,
There are two reasons for the dies listed that do not have photos attached. The first being on RPMs. At first, we wanted to match the numbers of our dies as closely with those numbers of other established standards. Almost everyone used the "RPM Book" as a means to attribute their RPMs because it was the most complete reference book available, and pretty much covered all of the RPMs known until the process changed, and RPMs were no longer possible. Therefore, all of the known RPMs from the RPM Book, and our own numbers are identical. The difference is those RPMs that have been found and attributed after that book was published. As you can see, we have added literally hundreds of RPMs that are not identified in other places. Some good examples are 1958D where the book shows 17 varieties, we show 41, 1959D where the book shows 20 varieties, we show 51, 1960D where the book shows 110 varieties, we show 160, and 1961D where the book shows 69 varieties and we show a few more. You will see examples of this throughout our RPM listings.
The other reason for varieties identified is that either Chuck or I have assigned a number to a variety we have or have taken pictures of, but have not uploaded them to the site for one reason or another. This in turn 'reserves' the number so that the other attributer doesn't use it. We normally use the next available number when doing attributions unless the other attributer identifies it as already been reserved. There are other reasons too, such as wanting to keep the MAJOR variety numbers in line with the others out there.
Contrary to popular belief, we do not hate our rivals and competition. We sometimes work very closely together and many of us know each other personally. What we dislike is the generalized die descriptions on other sites and/or books that make it virtually impossible to attribute your own coins.
Chuck's coppercoins.com vision was to be able to have a more in-depth variety system that empowers folks to research and do their own attributions based on readily available information. Of course, at this time, we only deal in Lincoln Cents, but in the future, we hope to use this same format to expand to other denominations.

[Dick]

Steven, and Bob, I was going to comment along the same line as you, Steven, but the mouse somehow put me in lincoln cents.com! Anyway, while I was getting back where I thought I was, Bob came up with a very good explanation about what we were seeking. Mind-reader, Bob?
At any rate, with what Bob said, and what we know about CC, we have the best site going, and the best opportunity to learn more about what we take for granted, "the lowly cent"! We owe Chuck a great debt of gratitude, and to "Santas helpers", without whom, we would still be trying to deci[her the RPM book, The CPG, and many otheres that give only text, or a photo, as a guide.
Dick

[hasfam]

It looks identical to the #003 in the RPM book. I'm beginning to understand the critical importance of clear defining markers to be able to truly identify a variety with accuracy. I know I have a large handful of ULV's because of the lack of references to attribute them. The discovery of this sight hopefully will help me narrow down my pile of "need to ID". If I was to go by just the pic, I would say it's dead on to the #003.
Rock

[Steven]

Thanks everyone and welcome Rock.

Steven

[eagames]

When trying to interpret the guides that give text without images it's tough to understand what they mean. For example the might say "a strong second image" but if they say that they mean it's hubbed strong not seperated far apart, they might say "medium doubling" but they mean seperation not strength of the image. On top of that they probably aren't totaly consistent, it's tough to say what's minor, medium or strong or if they use the words consistently.

Another gotcha is markers, on certain years certain cracks in the same location happen on many different dies. For example look at 06-P and many of them get similar forehead or hair cracks or get similar column cracks on the reverse. Another example is 55-P die 3, everyone lists the crack on the T of cent but if you look at 55-P about half of the dies got cracks on the T and hair cracks on the obv. So many wheats got reverse cracks from wheat to rim without a photo those mean little. Because of this these descriptions only help in a limited way unless the marker is realy unique. Bottom line.... without photos of each stage some varieties stay marked with a ?.

[Bob P]

Steven,
I did an overlay of your pics with a scan from the RPM book. I can say with some certainty that yours is indeed die 003. Congrats on a very nice find!

[Steven]

Thanks for the look up and overlay.
One of these days I may get my hands on an RPM book.
Steven