1997

[D42]

This 1997 stood out from the other 1997 cents I have seen
while going through a box that I picked-up from the bank.
Does this look like a possible double ear ??
If full OBV and REV pictures are needed I’ll clean it up a bit
And try and get better pictures ( it’s not in great shape)

[coop]

Looks like a bag mark from what I see.

[D42]

I can’t win them all.
Coop, I saw your reply regarding the 1989 1c RDV-006
on another forum . I found one of these last night
are they worth saving ?
I’m not sure where to post it, here or under errors ?

[coop]

The 1989 Cents normally have the RDV-006 reverse. That is just the correct way they should be. So your coin is normal.

005 happen on 1986-1988
006 happen on 1989-1992
007 happen on 1993-2008

Here is a better breakdown of these:
http://www.varietyvista.com/Lincoln%20Cent%20RDV%20Changes.htm

[D42]

Here’s a quick picture of the initials of the 1989-P
I’ll try and get a closer shot of them tonight.

[coop]

That is the normal RDV-006 for that year. Note how the top of the G looks. Just a very worn die.

[D42]

Looks like I picked up a bad box of cents this time.
The only thing I have found is a 2000 wide AM
and a couple of wheat cents.
But there’s always the next box.

[coppercoins]

Coop - nice images. I would recommend adding the 'TAT' of 'STATES' to the diagnostic images since they differ greatly between the close-AM and wide-AM reverses.

[coop]

Thanks Chuck. I will have to check that out.

[Dick]

Chuck, and Coop, I imagine it depends on whether it is tied directly, with the highly sought after "wide A M", according to date, right?
Thanks,

[coppercoins]

Not exactly sure what you mean, Dick...but basically it's like this: The entire design was changed when they went from the wide-AM to the close-AM. There are many tiny differences between the two designs, but the most visible differences are in the spacing of those two letters, the distance from the base to the initials, and the spacing between the TAT of STATES. I was only pointing out to Coop that adding that difference in would make his diagnostic images that much better.

[mojaveblue]

COOP - thanks for the link to the extended image definitions of the RDV's.

[Dick]

Chuck, I was referring to the 1992. That is the only one that I knew about, (and never saw one). I didn't know about the detail of the TAT in states. I guess I have been away longer than I realized.

[coppercoins]

It's simple, actually.

When they re-engraved the design in 1992 for the 1993 cents (the close-AM design) they got the A a little closer to the left T. On the wide-AM design they had been pretty much dead-on equidistant.

So if you look at the three letters on the wide-AM design they are spaced properly, but on the close-AM design they look like 'TA T'.

I learned this when someone loaned a cent to me that had been struck off-center. The last digit of the date was missing, so all I had was '200-'. The 'AM' and designers initials were chopped off the reverse, and my job was to find out whether this was the correct reverse design. A little study of the two different designs on other cents brought this difference to light and led me to ascertain that the off-center cent was indeed a 2000 wide-AM. ANACS wasn't impressed. They wouldn't holder the coin as 'special' because it could have been any post-1999 date...although 2000 is the only date that fits on which the wide AM is known. oh well...

[Dick]

Chuck, thank you for the explanation. it was a lot different than I expected. it also makes me think of the way I am going about the "current passion". It takes a lot more than just a 10X glass to see the details. In my case, it takes a LOT more that that!
I wonder if, one day, they will be digging into the die hierarchy, of the US cent(s)? It could get very deep, fast. I believe you are already aware of that, and have been for a long time.
ANACS leaves a lot to be desired, IMHO. I don't know anything about PCGS, but many believe in it, so it can't be all wrong.
Cheers,