FS# 1c-030.7 Real doubled die?

[Gabe]

This coin listed in the CPG FS# 1c-030.7, seems to me to show extreme machine doubling. Wiles and Wexler dont believe that this coin is a doubled die, but Bill Fivaz does.

What do you guys think? I think that the coin is a case of machine doubling, since the doubling in question is very shelf like, and does not seem to have any distinct pattern of doubling that would make it fall into any class of doubling.

Any comments?

[Bob P]

I agree completely that it is in fact abrasion doubling. There are other examples (1976) that show almost the exact same sort of doubling, and those aren't listed anywhere. I don't suspect it will be in the CPG the next time this series goes to print...but then again, you never know.

[pennyhound]

Gabe

This should be no contest ... due to the fact that all of the third party grading services have recognized this variety as being a doubled die ... (PCGS, NGC-6, ANACS-23, PCI, ICG, and other/s) in grades from Fine to MS-66RD ... with these still being bought and sold. (most recent on E-Bay, 7 Jan. 2005, MS-65RD by PCGS)

1971 FS# 1-030.7 (FS-030.7) CONECA 5-O-IV (Class 4- Offset Hub Doubling) before it was dropped from the files of CONECA. As noted:PG 139 of The CHERRYPICKER"S GUIDE to rare die varieties fourth edition - volume one, by Bill Fivaz, J.T.Stanton and Mike Ellis, all NLG/s. Published in 2000. "Some specialists feel this is not a doubled die. John Wexler recently published a study where he concludes it is abrasion doubling. James Wiles agreed and deleted the listing from the CONECA files."

I find myself asking ... how can all these grading services be wrong, or did thy just go on "other/s option/s" and not thier own, of this die? (being a doubled die) Seems a bit like the blind leading the blind!

I, myself have not bought one of these, because I too, feel it to be "abrasion doubling" and not a true doubled die, but who am I to say ... with PCGS, NGC and ANACS (& other/s) accepting it as being a true, doubled die. (surely thy have more, combined experience, than I)

But this to, is just my option.

[coppercoins]

The grading services don't attribute coins. They compare coins to published pictures and slab them as such. If someone published that such and such is a doubled die, the grading services will slab all examples as such. They aren't in to playing authority to die varieties, they are grading authorities.

[pennyhound]

Hummm ... well now that you state it that, way ... makes alot of since, I've often wandered about that. (if thy just graded the coin or thy also attributed also ... so that is were the other charge comes in ... for attibutaion ... still learning)

[Bob P]

Pennyhound....That is actually a very popular misconception. A lot of people think that the attibutions on slabs are made by the third party grading services. They also assume that they are accurate. Well...we all know better than that. That's also another reason why putting the attribution on a slab may not necessarily be the best bet. Sometimes the numbers change, get dropped etc. I personally think the grading services are doing a good service to collectors in that respect, but most of the work is done for them already. You tell them what the attribution number should be, they'll verify it and place it on the slab. But...if the numbers change, or the listing gets dropped...then what do you have? At least a graded coin. I believe, they also have a certain criteria on what attribution numbers they'll put on there, but I'm not absolutely sure.

[Gabe]

Thanks for your input. I had seen one of these coins for sale on ebay, and I wanted a second opinion, since I knew that there was controversy behind the coin.

Thanks