1974 S RPM?
1 1

6 posts in this topic

Been batting about 0 for 8 recently on true DD’s.... lol but I do check all of my MM’s as well. Here’s one I just found. Looks like a possible RPM due to the decently defined fattening at the upper left curve of the S. Thank you!

-Greg

82093345-7844-4002-AB43-7D51875781F1.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Coinbuf said:

There are no known RPM's for this date/mm.

I am familiar and clear that there are no known examples of a 74 s RPM. I am trying to learn here on this forum and take all comments, criticism, replies and opinions to heart. In your professional opinion, what could have caused this potential RPM to have occurred? 

Edited by Greg Bradford
In ANYONE’S professional opinion.......not just Coinbuf’s. (Sorry I typed that way)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks to me like it has taken a hit flattening the top left of the mm. If you look closely, you can see where the primary mm is   missing the top left part of the S. If it was a RPM, the top of the S would be complete with no missing area.

Edited by Greenstang
Correct typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Greenstang said:

Looks to me like it has taken a hit flattening the top left of the mm. If you look closely, you can see where the primary mm is   missing the top left part of the S. If it was a RPM, the top of the S would be complete with no missing area.

Roger that Greenstang. I did some more looking into 1974 s MM’s and their potential for RPM’s on Variety Vista. Granted the pic I supplied was not the best to discern PMD vs. an RPM. What “I” can see under magnification, with coin in hand, is that there is not any flattening on that upper left curve. It’s actually pretty well defined and the underlying “S” is rounded much like a a true DD. This Mint Mark appears to fall into the MMS-008 category best I can tell, not the blob MMS-009 that was introduced later in the year if I understand that correctly. The serifs and overall curvature resemble the 008 as opposed to the 009. The 008 “S” looks much thinner in totality which makes me wonder where the extra material at the top left of the S came from. I will do my best to take a clearer photo and post it. Thank you. 
-Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are a couple more photos of this 1974 S MM. I just now realized the oddity on the 7 in the date. Please advise. Thank you. 97754AF4-75D4-4930-A588-352220D91381.jpeg.c586bc715db6ef74aacb3306cb066671.jpeg

7FDFA414-63C4-49AB-B790-E667E128BA00.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
1 1