BusinessDemiGOD

Thank you all for your insight and saving me from some embarrassment at my first coin show 😅

Thanks for all of your feedback! There is still a bit I need to understand…

Yes, somehow coming in between the die and the planchet on first strike but then getting re struck.... Its the only thing i can think of. The pattern size and rounded to flattened parts of horns are identical but if its pmd then wouldn't it look different?

I found the same doubling aspects in the 1960-P Varieties but don't understand why the Denver minted ones aren't acknowledged.... These are images off of my 1960-D Lincoln Cent

Very disappointing that people can turn something enjoyable into criminal intent for greed. I'm going to be attending my first coin show here in Tennessee... Maybe i can find someone and discuss things like this in person without taking up to much of there time! Thank you once again for your time!

I believe this quarter has a strike through from a 25C Canadian Quarter with Reverse being A Deer. Ive submitted photos to multiple places only to get an immediate response that its damaged without actually looking closer to the details. Common Logic: Water damage would be even on a surface that is even. The aspect of the deterioration on the obverse is not consistent with that of liquid damage because the face is elevated making it impossible to have a consistent circular pattern. Comparing the reverse of the 25c Canadian coin with the obverse of this US quarter it seems logical that it would be a match. Also on reverse I'm not sure if its a tape strike through? Images are taken with Microscope x16. If more photos are needed i have more... I appreciate all the help in figuring this out and better understanding this....

I was simply just trying to understand so I'm more knowledgeable in numismatics. I'm still fairly new...... I do like the approach to not assisting in the counterfeit coins! Thanks for your time

Im curious as to how you have made this conclusion. I have been researching this coin and its multiple variants and have noticed something peculiar... If the image of the coin looks aged, or smoothed, it is immediately considered a replica. I can see the obvious cheap casting aspects but i also have came across a vast amount of aged and smoothed coins that were 100% real... How did you reach your conclusion so i can better understand what the distinguishing factors are for a coin that has so many variations and no substantial records of mintage. I greatly appreciate yours as well as anyone else who can assist in this.