Is there a 1970 D Large Date that has a D over S error? 1 1

[Blackmon0803]

I tried to upload pics but getting an error. I have a 1970 D Lincoln Cent that is super shiny and mirrored. Then under the scope it looks like a clear S under the D. The pictures will be uploaded asap. 

Edited Sunday at 09:48 PM by Blackmon0803
Added pictures

[Greenstang]

There is no such variety as a 1970D/S  but show a clear photo and we will try to figure out what you have.

[powermad5000]

Sounds like you have a proof coin, unless you have a standard circulation strike that was ruined by polishing. The proof should have a superior strike by its means of manufacture so it shouldn't be hard to determine once you provide us with a proper picture of both sides of the coin. Hopefully this is not another high mag seeing something that is not significant situation.

Also to note, however, proofs should be superior coins, but it has been noted that even proofs can have issues.

We shall wait and see.

[Blackmon0803]

On 6/30/2024 at 2:16 PM, powermad5000 said:

Sounds like you have a proof coin, unless you have a standard circulation strike that was ruined by polishing. The proof should have a superior strike by its means of manufacture so it shouldn't be hard to determine once you provide us with a proper picture of both sides of the coin. Hopefully this is not another high mag seeing something that is not significant situation.

Also to note, however, proofs should be superior coins, but it has been noted that even proofs can have issues.

We shall wait and see.

I will have them posted in 10 minutes 

[Blackmon0803]

On 6/30/2024 at 11:51 AM, Blackmon0803 said:

I tried to upload pics but getting an error. I have a 1970 D Lincoln Cent that is super shiny and mirrored. Then under the scope it looks like a clear S under the D. The pictures will be uploaded asap. 

Also the pictures I tried but as you can see there was a strike issue on the reverse and seems double on obverse. It is shiny on the reverse just like the obverse

[Sandon]

   First of all, this coin appears to have normal luster and color for an original "red" uncirculated 95% copper cent. All 1970 proofs were made in San Francisco and have an "S" mintmark. 

   I see no evidence of this being a "D over S" or other overmintmark variety. The characteristics of the underlying mintmark would have to be observable at 5-7x magnification. The "D" may have been lightly repunched, although your photos don't really support this either. Before about 1990, mintmarks were individually punched into working dies, so they vary widely in position, depth and peculiarities of the particular punch used.  There are no significant die varieties for 1970-D cents listed on NGC VarietyPlus. You could try such sites as varietyvista.com to see if there are any known minor repunched mintmarks ("RPM"s) for 1970-D cents.

   Here is a photo of a "Redbook" variety 1955-D over S nickel, showing how much stronger the characteristics of an overmintmark that can be identified as such would have to be:

P.S. An overmintmark or repunched mintmark is classified as a die variety, not a mint error. See Variety vs. Mint Error | NGC (ngccoin.com).

Edited Sunday at 10:24 PM by Sandon
Add postscript

[Coinbuf]

On 6/30/2024 at 9:51 AM, Blackmon0803 said:

. I have a 1970 D Lincoln Cent that is super shiny and mirrored. Then under the scope it looks like a clear S under the D 

I see nothing but a normal coin and a normal D mintmark.

[Blackmon0803]

On 6/30/2024 at 5:39 PM, Coinbuf said:

I see nothing but a normal coin and a normal D mintmark.

I will post the mintmark further out. Also the luster is so much more shiny than the photos. Also is that not doubling in the in God we trust? I thought it just looked out. I will check resources provided. Thanks in advance. 

[Sandon]

On 6/30/2024 at 9:45 PM, Blackmon0803 said:

Also is that not doubling in the in God we trust? 

    I can see some minor die crumbling and/or die chips in that area, nothing that would be considered "doubling", even the "worthless" kinds. See, for example, Double Dies vs. Machine Doubling | NGC (ngccoin.com). The magnification you're using is too high and will make most coins you look at appear to have some sort of anomalies. I use a 10x loupe, and most experts recommend that nothing higher than 5x-7x be used for grading or identifying die varieties. Mint errors should be visible to the unaided eye.

    Everything you've been asking about on this topic involves advanced subjects in numismatics (die varieties such as overmintmarks, repunched mintmarks, and doubled dies and mint errors). It may be very difficult for you to understand these subjects or for us to explain them to you unless you have a good grasp of more basic areas. Do you have such basic resources as a current (2025) or recent edition "Redbook" and a grading guide? If not, what print or online sources are you using to learn about coins? 

Edited yesterday at 03:44 AM by Sandon

[powermad5000]

I see a very lightly circulated 1970 D Lincoln Memorial cent RD (Red) in color and not a proof coin. While the surface might be very reflective, it is not mirror like in my opinion and I doubt it would achieve a PL designation as that would look different even in the photos. I can see some of the circulation hits on both sides of this cent as well as the pillars and steps of the memorial on the reverse showing slight wear. Abe is showing slight wear on the obverse as well.

I see a very sloped like look surrounding the entire letter of some of the lettering on the obverse as well as a couple minor die chips near the rim on some letters. That would tell me there is some very slight die erosion doubling possibly but nothing more. I also think this same effect is showing around the mintmark giving you the impression that it is an OMM, but I don't see what I should especially for a D over S or an S over D situation.

I have to warn once again when using high mag to try to "find" things on a coin. It may have its use if you find something of interest at 5X or 7X or even 10X, but high mag has typically caused many people to "see" something that is actually not significant as far as either grading or variety attribution goes and typically sends the user down a rabbit hole. My advice is to get a 7X or 10X magnifier or loupe and use only that to look at your coins. If it is any kind of statement, the most I have is 10X and have used that for well over a decade while still being able to successfully identify all major and even some very minor varieties on my coins that I have submitted.

[Blackmon0803]

On 6/30/2024 at 10:43 PM, Sandon said:

    I can see some minor die crumbling and/or die chips in that area, nothing that would be considered "doubling", even the "worthless" kinds. See, for example, Double Dies vs. Machine Doubling | NGC (ngccoin.com). The magnification you're using is too high and will make most coins you look at appear to have some sort of anomalies. I use a 10x loupe, and most experts recommend that nothing higher than 5x-7x be used for grading or identifying die varieties. Mint errors should be visible to the unaided eye.

    Everything you've been asking about on this topic involves advanced subjects in numismatics (die varieties such as overmintmarks, repunched mintmarks, and doubled dies and mint errors). It may be very difficult for you to understand these subjects or for us to explain them to you unless you have a good grasp of more basic areas. Do you have such basic resources as a current (2025) or recent edition "Redbook" and a grading guide? If not, what print or online sources are you using to learn about coins? 

Thanks guys. I was thinking that it may have been a RPM at best. It was just a really nice specimen for that year. It was confusing as when I looked out farther from the scope I saw something under the D. Then researching found there were no such varieties. I do understand a lot more about doubling. It gets tricky when you see a lot of that with the naked eye. Then I realize that most doubling will always take place in the same direction. It is not worth grading. I have so many years that are in high red condition. I have several 83, 82, 82 D, and also 1999, 99 D, 1995 with the DDO. I just need some research done to make sure I am not wasting money on grading. I have 1960 RD and 1975 RD Also. It is just going to be research and looking into what you guys provide. Thanks in advance. I have an Elivik series scope that only does 50× through 1000× magnification. I have to reduce that. It plays tricks on you when scoping in that far. I can see the 95 clearly and also have a 92 D Close Am in super great condition. Thanks guys

[Blackmon0803]

On 7/1/2024 at 12:10 AM, Blackmon0803 said:

Thanks guys. I was thinking that it may have been a RPM at best. It was just a really nice specimen for that year. It was confusing as when I looked out farther from the scope I saw something under the D. Then researching found there were no such varieties. I do understand a lot more about doubling. It gets tricky when you see a lot of that with the naked eye. Then I realize that most doubling will always take place in the same direction. It is not worth grading. I have so many years that are in high red condition. I have several 83, 82, 82 D, and also 1999, 99 D, 1995 with the DDO. I just need some research done to make sure I am not wasting money on grading. I have 1960 RD and 1975 RD Also. It is just going to be research and looking into what you guys provide. Thanks in advance. I have an Elivik series scope that only does 50× through 1000× magnification. I have to reduce that. It plays tricks on you when scoping in that far. I can see the 95 clearly and also have a 92 D Close Am in super great condition. Thanks guys

Also have 2 1961 In super great red condition. I will continue to study. 

[Just Bob]

On 7/1/2024 at 12:10 AM, Blackmon0803 said:

 Then I realize that most doubling will always take place in the same direction. 

You picked up on something that many new collectors haven't noticed. There are forms of die erosion doubling that, because of the stresses created during the striking of the coin, tend to occur on the side of the lettering, devices, and numerals away from the center of the coin. This shows up frequently on plated coins, like the 1943 Lincoln cent, and on the post-1982 plated Lincoln cents.