Can MD be consistent over multiple strikes? 0

[Woods020]

Something I have been meaning to ask for a while, and haven’t gotten to it. I got rained off the golf course this afternoon so I’m going through some 60s silver rolls I bought at an estate sale recently. 
 

I opened a roll that seemingly is original from 64 of Denver minted dimes. It was a neat old roll but curiosity made me open it. Anyway probably 35-40 of them in the roll all exhibit the same doubling on the mint mark. I do not think this is an RPM and it seems like MD vs DDD to me. So here are my questions:

1. Confirm this is MD? If it is DDD it answers my second question  

2. If yes, can MD be replicated over many strikes? As I think through it, it seems improbable that multiple strikes of a loose component would move the same way multiple times. If it was DDD I could see it because the dies are worn and it is consistent although worsening over time. I have seen a few instances now of this type of doubling that is consistent across multiple coins. Thoughts? Been curious a while and this roll reminded me to ask. 

[RWB]

The book "From Mine to Mint" explains how most mechanical doubling occurs.

[Disclaimer -- I wrote the book.]

Edited July 11, 2021 by RWB

[Woods020]

2 hours ago, RWB said:

The book "From Mine to Mint" explains how most mechanical doubling occurs.

[Disclaimer -- I wrote the book.]

What section? I have the book and read it, but don’t remember where to find it. I’ve read a lot on the subject just still confused on how it can be so consistent over multiple strikes. I’ll go back and read the relevant section. I fully grasp the concept and cause, just curious how it can be so consistent. 

Edited July 11, 2021 by Woods020

[Woods020]

2 hours ago, SlickCoins said:

Oh super sweet, you said you've got a whole roll that is like this one?

Obverse right side 'field' lined up with bottom of his hairline, obverse left field lined up with his eyes and under his nose.

May I see a few more to see if they have marks also?

Very nice dimes Woods

It’s just a well deteriorated die and bag marks. Other than that doubling on the MM nothing to note. And I’m just using it as an example to learn how a moving part can move in the same way with repetition. 
 

If you pick up 99.9% of coins other than immaculate examples they will all have marks. They go off the press into bins. Then into huge bags with thousands of its kind. Then to multiple levels of distribution, rolling, etc. The fascination with stray marks isn’t productive to your time. Many more things to learn and study on coins that will serve you better. 

Edited July 11, 2021 by Woods020

[Woods020]

45 minutes ago, Woods020 said:

2 hours ago, RWB said:

The book "From Mine to Mint" explains how most mechanical doubling occurs.

[Disclaimer -- I wrote the book.]

What section? I have the book and read it, but don’t remember where to find it. I’ve read a lot on the subject just still confused on how it can be so consistent over multiple strikes. I’ll go back and read the relevant section. I fully grasp the concept and cause, just curious how it can be so consistent. 

RWB - I found the small section in FMTM, but it doesn’t answer my question.  You refer to it being chatter, which I understand, but what I don’t get is how can it be consistent? You use an example of spinning a quarter on a surface and pressing it down with a half dollar. Highly exaggerated for demonstration I get but that also illustrates how it would be hard to have the same effect over and over. 

[Jason Abshier]

Poor man 1955 cent is and example of how a deteriorating die can make the same impression over and over again exactly the same ,  I seen no difference with Mint mark on your coins showing the same effect 

[RWB]

8 hours ago, Woods020 said:

RWB - I found the small section in FMTM, but it doesn’t answer my question.  You refer to it being chatter, which I understand, but what I don’t get is how can it be consistent? You use an example of spinning a quarter on a surface and pressing it down with a half dollar. Highly exaggerated for demonstration I get but that also illustrates how it would be hard to have the same effect over and over. 

Understood. The "chatter" in a toggle press was caused by excessive mechanical wear, improper lubrication or a defective part of the press. Any of these could produce repeated vibration and shifting press mechanisms such as feeders, central stake holding a die, or other parts. All of the press parts were moved by gears and any gear could be worn or damaged. Once the defective press part was replaced, the mechanical doubling would disappear - until something else wore or broke. (See also the toggle press patent in Journal of Numismatic Research, Issue #1.)

[J P M]

Well one thing is for sure Woods the roll was consistent with that many coins with the same MM. So I would say it was a roll from the mint or distribution center and not from someone's kitchen table 

[Woods020]

2 hours ago, Jason Abshier said:

Poor man 1955 cent is and example of how a deteriorating die can make the same impression over and over again exactly the same ,  I seen no difference with Mint mark on your coins showing the same effect 

Yes DDD (die deterioration doubling) is fairly consistent and makes complete sense given the cause. This appears to be shelf doubling (I.e. mechanical doubling) which is caused by something shifting in the striking. I was curious how that would be consistent. Logically it just seems unlikely that if there was something moving in a machine moving as fast and with as much pressure as a coin press the coins would shift erratically. I’m beginning to understand it could be a controlled shift. 

[Woods020]

7 minutes ago, J P Mashoke said:

Well one thing is for sure Woods the roll was consistent with that many coins with the same MM. So I would say it was a roll from the mint or distribution center and not from someone's kitchen table 

Agreed. It was fun to wonder what was in it. I could see the coins on the end but no date. But I’m fairly sure it was a fresh mint roll from back in the day. I just hate it wasn’t a roll from new dies with strong bands. But I’ll take it. 

[J P M]

14 minutes ago, Woods020 said:

Agreed. It was fun to wonder what was in it. I could see the coins on the end but no date. But I’m fairly sure it was a fresh mint roll from back in the day. I just hate it wasn’t a roll from new dies with strong bands. But I’ll take it. 

At the least it was not like my Uncirculated plastic roll of Nickels' that were all worn out except for the top one LoL

[Rummy13]

Thank you @RWB us new coin collectors really like the help you guys give us. Your knowledge is so nice to tap into. I do not think some of the people really apricate what all you and other do for the collecting community. I for one have learned a lot. I am sorry that my eyes are so bad that I can not read your books, so I could learn even more and in some detail.

[RWB]

1 hour ago, Rummy13 said:

Thank you @RWB us new coin collectors really like the help you guys give us. Your knowledge is so nice to tap into. I do not think some of the people really apricate what all you and other do for the collecting community. I for one have learned a lot. I am sorry that my eyes are so bad that I can not read your books, so I could learn even more and in some detail.

The CDs and PDF files that accompany some of the books are compliant for visually impaired reader software.