Drick6sy19

Hello my trusted Coin Hunters and Numismatists! I wanted to get your opinion on a coin I found during a recent find I had from an uncirculated roll of 1975-P Lincoln Cents. In the roll, I came across a coin that appeared to have what looked like a brush stroke across the southeastern corner of the obverse. Being that the coin was from an uncirculated roll and the all the coins in the roll were in terrific mint state condition, this brush like blemish would seemingly come from the minting process or immediately following it's production. I wanted to share the photos and see if anyone has come across this and is willing to share what the likely cause might be. Take a look and I would love to hear your thoughts! Thanks in advance!

Thanks to all who shared their thoughts. I appreciate your input as it is helping me learn.

I was coin roll hunting and came across a 1916-D Lincoln Wheat Cent. After closer inspection there appears to be an over mint mark (D over S). I wanted to share this with the forum to see what more experienced collectors/numismatists thought. Take a look and let me know what you think. Thanks in advance for your feedback.

I was thinking it might have been a die clash but it was so small and localized, it had me doubting. Thanks for your insight!

During my latest coin roll hunt I came across a 2021-P Washington Crossing the Delaware quarter that had an interesting characteristic on the reverse. In front of Washington's face there appears to be a die break or some other anamoly that I can't find information on. What do you think this is? Have you seen it before? Any directions on where to find more information would be appreciated.

Here's my question on location of mint marks. Considering the inverted nature of the mint mark, was this a result of the hand punching? If so, can location be a reliable indicator of validity since every hand punch would vary in location?

I'm not suggesting mine is worth that. My point was that if you compare what the MS 66 went for vs non-Inverted MS 66 1941-S Jeffersons, the inverted are getting 5-7 times the value. I'm only suggesting that clearly there is a value in finding a inverted variety vs the typical. Mine, even in its current condition (assuming I am able to obtain some sort of confirmation) will be worth keeping it in my personal collection even if it's only worth a couple dollars due to it's rarity.

I would think an “S” is an “S” normally too, but there appears to be a premium on the Inverted S according to the PCGS price guide as well as sales that have occurred on Heritage Auctions.

The top pick is a close-up of my coin’s mm.

What really makes me think it is, is how the bottom arc (usually on top on the right side up examples) is slightly thinner and does not extend out to the width of the opposing loop on the top (which would normally be the bottom). However with the damage, I am cautious as that may be west causing that difference.

If that is the case, how/why did PCGS have a distinction between a small s (#4012) and an inverted s (#38489 - FS-024.6)? https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/detail/38489

I have a beat up 1941-S Jefferson Nickel that appears to have an inverted mint mark. What do you think?

Unfortunately, the coin is pretty worn making it difficult to see die scratches that align.

Hey all! Looking for your opinions on a 1964-D I came across roll hunting. The coin isn't in great condition but appears to have an RPM. On Variety Vista it appears similar to RPM-002 or RPM-004 (http://varietyvista.com/05 JN RPMs/RPMs 1964D.htm). What do you think?

@J P MYeah, I looked there and http://lincolncentresource.com/doubledies/doubledies.html to see if this was a known issue and didn't find anything.

I've been familiar with the machine doubling but I've not seen as much separation that is exhibited in this coin on a machine doubling. Usually it is just a ledge extending off one side. The "8" especially may have tricked me.

I came across a 1986-D Lincoln Memorial that had doubling on the date (and perhaps an RPM). I've checked the various resources I know to see if this is a known variety/error and have been unable to locate similar examples. Take a look and tell me what you think or if you've come across anything similar. Thanks!

So this thread is a perfect representation of the debate I have been having in my own head. The "B"/"3" is interesting as I've never come across such an issue (albeit I don't have the wealth of experience you all have) and am intrigued by how it was created. That said, I have been debating in my own mind the very same conflicting ideas of defect/chip of the die versus simply damage from circulation. I am planning on attending the upcoming PCGS show in Vegas in a couple weeks, I was going to take it with me for some people to have a live look at it and get their opinions. I'll follow-up with the consensus I receive from that. Thanks all for the input!

@Sandon, yes that is good information regarding the BIE error. I have actually come across a few examples of those during my roll hunting. This particular one (the B looking like a 3) is the first time I've seen something like this and I wasn't having any success finding any similar information while researching this type of issue. @bsshog40, when I try to angle the coin to see if material has been pushed over, I don't see any additional material (I'll try and capture a picture). That being said, the material could have been chipped away.

I was roll hunting and came across this 1957-D Wheat Cent that had an interesting issue with the "B" in Liberty. It makes the B look like a "3". Has anyone come across this? Is this a grease error or something else? It doesn't appear to be circulation damage. Love to hear what people think.