Sandon

Welcome to the NGC chat board. First of all, please note that a coin struck from a doubled die would be classified as a die variety, not as a mint error. The variety would pertain to most or all coins struck from that die, while a mint error is generally produced by a problem in producing a particular coin. Based on your photos, which are somewhat blurry, there are faint, shelf-like extra images that are not indicative of a doubled die. This is likely strike doubling (a.k.a. machine or mechanical doubling), which results from the die being loose in the press and is very common. See Double Dies vs. Machine Doubling | NGC (ngccoin.com). Such coins do not command a premium and should not be submitted to third-party grading services, which will not attribute them. For more about strike doubling and other forms of doubling on coins that do not have collector value, see https://www.doubleddie.com/144801.html and links therein on mechanical doubling, die deterioration doubling, and abrasion doubling. Since 1996, when the mint changed its method of manufacturing dies to a "single squeeze", there are far fewer significant doubled die varieties. There are some minor ones that can be found on the doubleddie.com and varietyvista.com websites.

This appears to be a normal 1960-D large date cent, not the small date over large date variety. Please post full, cropped photos of both sides of a coin about which you have questions.

The coin is genuine but has been counterstamped by one or more metal punches with a political slogan after it entered circulation.

1875 Indian cent, PCGS graded MS 63 RB: Photos courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries.

This coin has been acid etched, which brought back some of the details, such as the bison's horn, which had probably worn away, but which is regarded as a severe impairment and wouldn't be saleable to serious collectors. You should buy coins in the best condition that you can afford.

1885 Liberty nickel, now NGC graded XF 45:

Although I would prefer better photos (both sides, better lit, focused and cropped, and from directly overhead), I think that it is likely that this 1900 half eagle is counterfeit. I see raised lumps of metal on Liberty's face and in the fields, and the details seem somewhat soft. The mint was careful about keeping gold coins within legal tolerance when the country was on the gold standard, and I doubt that a gold coin with as little wear as this would be a third of a gram underweight.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. The 1976-D Bicentennial quarter had a mintage of over 860 million pieces, and many were saved as novelties. They have no collector value in any circulated grade. The one you found has only light wear, and you can, of course, save it if it interests you.

You could be using a browser, such as Google Chrome, that doesn't work well with the NGC website. If you're using Chrome, try using Microsoft Edge. I've never been able to figure out why Chrome doesn't support many features on the NGC website, including certificate verification and the price guide, but it just doesn't, no matter what "cookie" or other settings I use.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. These are just common date U.S. one cent coins that currently circulate. Each one has a mintage in the billions, and they only have collector value in nearly perfect, uncirculated grades, which these aren't. Was there anything else you wanted to know about them?

1893-CC Morgan dollar, now NGC graded VF 30:

You are apparently looking at the score shown on the NGC Coin Explorer, but on the set I linked, a VF example is listed at 1531 points under the "Eligible Coins" listing. If you think that the score you received should be increased, you may request a score correction as shown in the following topic on the Registry forum: You may be able to find answers to other questions on the Registry forum, including in the section entitled "NGC Registry Help and Instructions". You may also want to post questions about the Registry on the forum for answers from the Administrator, who monitors it.

In what set in the Registry (not "register") are you looking?

1884 Morgan dollar, NGC graded MS 64:

I assume that your question is, "Does a VF 25 1937-D 3-legged Buffalo nickel receive 6 points in the NGC Registry?" The answer is "yes, in a type set." Type sets are scored solely on the type of the coin, its grade, and whether it was made in circulation strike or proof format. Any circulation issue 1913-38 "Variety 2" Buffalo nickel graded Very Fine would receive 6 points in a type set. I assume that you used the coin to fill a slot in a type set. In a date and mint set, such as Buffalo Nickels 1913-1938, Complete Circulation Issue Sets | NGC Registry | NGC (ngccoin.com), where the rarity of the specific issue counts, the 1937-D 3-legged Buffalo is worth 1531 points in Very Fine grade.

No, coins with filled mintmarks are not worth a premium due to that characteristic. Collectors generally prefer coins with clear mintmarks. The only 1979-P SBA dollar variety worth a premium is the "Wide Rim", which this coin isn't. See Anthony Dollars (1979-1999) | VarietyPlus® | NGC (ngccoin.com). Your 1979-P SBA dollar is circulated, appears to have been struck from worn dies, and has heavy marks on Anthony's face. It is only worth face value in this condition.

If you click the three horizontal dots on your initial post and select "Edit", you should be able to change the topic title.

You should change the topic title for it to receive proper attention and be of value to future readers. It can be difficult to distinguish the so-called "large" and "small" date 1970-S varieties. Based on the photos, which are somewhat unfocused, I think that both of these coins are "large dates", as are the vast majority of 1970-S cents, especially those taken from circulation. The "9" and "0" appear to be higher than the "7" on both coins. The tip of the inner curve of the "9" appears blunt as well. (I'd like to thank @Coinbuf from pointing out the latter feature, of which I wasn't previously aware.) The best way to distinguish the two varieties may be by looking at the obverse lettering instead of the date. Here are photos of the obverses of (1) a 1970-S "small date" cent in a 1970 "mint set" that I "cherrypicked" some years ago and (2) a 1970-S "large date" cent. Note how the lettering on the "small date" hub was much lighter than that on the "large date" hub. The lettering appears somewhat different on circulated coins, but I think that both of your coins have the bolder, "large date" lettering style.

1888 Liberty Seated dime in a green label PCGS holder giving a grade of "AU 53", while the PCGS database says, "PR 53". The coin has proof characteristics notwithstanding the weakness on Liberty's head, and the die variety exists in both proof (F-101) and circulation strike (F-101a) format. I bought it out of a dealer's "cheap slab" box for all of $45 in 1994.

FYI, a doubled die is classified as a die variety, not a mint error. A die variety generally pertains to most or all of the coins struck by a particular die pair, while a mint error occurs to individual coins. This coin is a major die variety listed in the "Red Book" and other standard coin price guides and is worth several hundred dollars even in circulated grades.

The die scratch from the rim above the "D" in "UNITED" is a diagnostic for authenticating the "Red Book" variety 1972 doubled die cent, as the OP apparently knew.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Unfortunately, your 1983 cent is an example of a coin that was altered after it left the mint to superficially resemble a coin that had been multiple struck. The secondary image being backwards, incuse and having a date (1976) from some years earlier reveals it to have been squeezed between two other struck coins, likely in a vise. See https://www.error-ref.com/squeeze-job-or-vice-job-or-garage-job/. Compare this with images of coins that were actually double struck at https://www.error-ref.com/multiple_strikes_on-center_off-center/, https://www.error-ref.com/mutiple-strike-in-out-collar/, https://www.error-ref.com/mulitple-strikes-flip-over/. Mint errors are an advanced topic in numismatics (coin collecting). It is very unusual to find any coin with a significant mint error in circulation. Unless you have some knowledge about coins, including how they are made, it is easy to be deceived by fabrications like this one. If you are interested in learning about U.S. coins and how to collect them, please so advise, and we can direct you to appropriate print and online resources.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Unfortunately, what you have is a crude counterfeit of a 1799 Draped Bust silver dollar. Large numbers of such bogus pieces have been produced overseas in recent decades, and some are older than that. For comparison, here are images of a genuine example, now graded VF 35 by NGC:

When you post coins on this forum, we assume that you are a newer or casual collector who is trying to obtain other opinions about them. You don't have to agree with any or all of us, nor should you take offense if some or all of us disagree with you. We have no way of knowing what you do or don't already know about coins, and when I include links to pertinent resources, I do so because I think that the topic author and/or other readers may find them helpful. We ask for full cropped photos of each side of a coin to assist us in evaluating it. We've never received such photos regarding the 2005-D cent. Based on the close-ups provided, your coin doesn't appear to me to exhibit die doubling on either side, nor does the darkened area appear to me be matter that was struck into the coin. Regarding the doubling, you might want to check such sites as doubleddie.com or varietyvista.com that list more minor doubled die varieties to see if you can find a match. Although foreign matter that was on a die or planchet has been embedded into coins at the time of striking, neither the 2005-D cent nor the 2021 Silver Eagle appear to me to be examples of such "retained strike throughs" based on the photos provided. See https://www.error-ref.com/?s=retained+struck+through.

The plating of copper-plated zinc cents is supposed to be pure copper, and whatever amount of zinc is in the plating--possibly more than the 5% that was used in the homogeneous alloy of both 1944-46 and 1962-82 brass cents--gives the coins a noticeably different color, which some collectors apparently find significant.