What if a die variety is the result of a doubled working hub 1 1

[VKurtB]

On 8/12/2024 at 5:18 PM, Jsweeney72 said:

Why dont you show me a 1964 10c (p) thats graded as an MS there buddy? Enlighten me?

I don’t know why anyone would have an MS Philly 1964 10¢ graded at all.

[Jsweeney72]

I felt dumb but ill be damned if i dont feel dumber after ridiculous convo with you

[Coinbuf]

On 8/12/2024 at 3:20 PM, Jsweeney72 said:

Show me a graded ms 1964p 10c please

Not sure why I'm doing your homework for you, reminds me of when my kids were 5 years old.   I'll show you 929,360,000 1964P dimes minted for circulation not proofs, this information is easily accessed here on the NGC website.   And bty, the fact that you found these coins in a roll told everyone here that these were not proofs, proofs were not sold by the roll, you should feel dumb.

 

If that one is not enough for you here is a screenshot of just three of the MS coins graded by NGC and in NGC registry sets. 

 

If you need more here is the mintage figures for the proofs produced in 1964.   Please note that neither the circulation strikes or the proof strikes have a mintmark which means that both were struck at the Philadelphia mint facility.

Edited August 12 by Coinbuf

[Sandon]

   If you're under the impression that all 1964 dimes are (or are "graded as") proofs, you're quite mistaken and obviously haven't been learning about coins from reliable resources. (Where did you get your information?)

   "Proof" is a method of manufacture, not a grade. Proof strikes are specially made for collectors and VIPs, while "regular" or circulation strikes are mass produced for circulation. All 1964 proof coins were individually packaged in 1964 proof sets, along with proof examples of the other four denominations from cent to half dollar issued that year.  All 1964 proof coins were minted at the Philadelphia mint.  Proof coins from that era are very sharply struck, with mirrorlike fields that on the earliest strikes from each die pair contrast with frosted devices and lettering (referred to as a "cameo" or "deep cameo" proof), as on the proof example shown on the images for the "1964 10C PF" issue shown on the page from the NGC Coin Explorer posted by @Coinbuf.  Proofs are separately handled and usually receive much higher grades than uncirculated (MS) examples. 

   The coin whose partial image you posted is clearly a circulation strike with typical, frosty luster, as would be expected from a coin taken from "an original bank roll". Coins distributed by banks for circulation at face value are circulation strikes.  A roll consisting entirely of proofs could only be created by removing the coins from fifty different 1964 proof sets. I would need clearer photos (of both full sides of the coin as well as better closeups) to form an opinion as to whether the coin may have been struck from a doubled die. You might want to check doubleddie.com and varietyvista.com, which include more minor and lesser-known varieties than those on VarietyPlus, to see if you can find a match. It is very unlikely, though not impossible, that a new doubled die variety would be discovered.

 

[powermad5000]

A proof 64. This does not look like the coin in the OP's partial photo. That is why I was checking Variety Plus in the MS section to see why they weren't granted variety attribution. Is it possible then you filled out the paperwork for these as PF and not as MS? Being I know NGC is not allowed to adjust anyone's submission paperwork, if you submitted under the wrong status, i.e. submitted MS coins as PF, I could see the end result being very much not what you were looking for.

 

[Jsweeney72]

Holy .. are you guys serious?! I know what a proof is.. thats half of what this topic was supposed to be about. Like seriously? Yes the 1964 10c (Philadelphia mint) were proofs. Im not sure whyyou guys feel the need to argue about that. Feel free to look it up by all means. I cant even believe thats what this chat transformed into. Like seriously im trying to be humble but telling me to go get a red book because not all 1964 dimes struck at the Philadelphia mint were proofs is something any one of you guys can verify within minutes. Tell you what…i meant what i said. I feel a whole lot dumber after talking to you guys. Learned nothing. My question was obviously wayyyy above most of your heads. Go back to picking your boogers and arguing about easily verifiable facts. 

Edited August 13 by Jsweeney72

[Jsweeney72]

On 8/13/2024 at 12:54 AM, powermad5000 said:

A proof 64. This does not look like the coin in the OP's partial photo. That is why I was checking Variety Plus in the MS section to see why they weren't granted variety attribution. Is it possible then you filled out the paperwork for these as PF and not as MS? Being I know NGC is not allowed to adjust anyone's submission paperwork, if you submitted under the wrong status, i.e. submitted MS coins as PF, I could see the end result being very much not what you were looking for.

 

No i did not recieve the coins yet, they havent been graded yet. I was reading a bunch of literature on doubled dies and it dawned on me that all 10 werent of that die variety. I didnt even know about die markings at the time. I just assumed if they were doubled the same they were the same. I would guess maybe 3 of them were fs101 and i still have 2 that are fs101. The other 7 i sent in have totally different polish scratching

[Jsweeney72]

On 8/13/2024 at 1:42 AM, Jsweeney72 said:

On 8/13/2024 at 12:54 AM, powermad5000 said:

A proof 64. This does not look like the coin in the OP's partial photo. That is why I was checking Variety Plus in the MS section to see why they weren't granted variety attribution. Is it possible then you filled out the paperwork for these as PF and not as MS? Being I know NGC is not allowed to adjust anyone's submission paperwork, if you submitted under the wrong status, i.e. submitted MS coins as PF, I could see the end result being very much not what you were looking for.

 

No i did not recieve the coins yet, they havent been graded yet. I was reading a bunch of literature on doubled dies and it dawned on me that all 10 werent of that die variety. I didnt even know about die markings at the time. I just assumed if they were doubled the same they were the same. I would guess maybe 3 of them were fs101 and i still have 2 that are fs101. The other 7 i sent in have totally different polish scratching

They were submitted correctly just incorrectly attributed on my part

[Jsweeney72]

On 8/12/2024 at 5:52 PM, Coinbuf said:

Your coin does not match the NGC FS101, your coin is not a proof and is just strike doubled.

Thanks…strike doubled? Is that the technical terminology? It striked double? Ill have to do some research on that one. They have strike doublers in variety plus?

[powermad5000]

I'll try to let the other comment pass as I would still like to help. Strike doubled is short for strike doubling which falls under the umbrella of mechanical doubling.

Maybe this article will clear up some of this for you.

Double Dies vs. Machine Doubling | NGC

https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/5688

 

 This article does not mention die erosion/die deterioration doubling however, which is another form of mechanical doubling. Die erosion doubling happens when dies are late stage to beyond late stage, past the point where they should have been changed for new dies. The flat surfaces of the die are compromised from too many strikes and they can no longer hold the metal of the flat parts of the die completely flat around the details of the die, typically the lettering and numerals. This produces a slope-like doubling around the lettering and numerals. Instead of two crisp, distinct images, the doubling surrounds the entire letter on all sides and is sloped in a ski slope like look.

 

Here is one more thing that might help.

 

 

 

 

[powermad5000]

If a coin is double struck, as in the planchet is fed into the press with the feeder finger, gets struck by the dies, and does not get ejected from the press and is struck a second time by the dies before being ejected, that will look nothing like a doubled die coin. This is covered in the following article.

Mint Error Coin Chronicles: Double Struck Coins - NGC

https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/13115

[powermad5000]

On 8/13/2024 at 12:52 AM, Jsweeney72 said:

They have strike doublers in variety plus?

This is something that TPG's will not attribute. These forms of doubling are considered poor quality control, not as attributable varieties.

[Jsweeney72]

On 8/13/2024 at 2:18 AM, powermad5000 said:

This is something that TPG's will not attribute. These forms of doubling are considered poor quality control, not as attributable varieties.

Yeah i was just busting the guys chops. Him and some other guy were trolling earlier. Just trying to argue about anything at all. I didn't mean it towards you. Thats why i said ‘most’  they were of the opinion that the Philadelphia mint did not strike proof dimes in 1964… again not a big deal definitely not common knowledge.. but to be that ignorant to just be stuck there blew my mind away

[Jsweeney72]

Yeah im not really leaning towards machine doubling being that i have the same doubling on more that one die. However i definitely do see the deterioration on one of them

[Jsweeney72]

The doubling is not what im questioning. I know a lot of people misunderstand what a doubled die is but im confident these coins are doubled dies

[J P M]

So you are not saying what you said earlier because you are aware that what you said was not what you meant to say.

[Coinbuf]

So the op starts a thread to complain because he sent a business strike dime to be attributed as a proof DDO variety, then argues that all dimes struck in Philly were only proofs, then wants proof that business strikes were also struck in Philly (presumably because he doesn't have a red book to reference), then goes off the rails and says he knows it all, then admits he was just a jerk and trolling his own thread because he didn't like some of the replies, then says the thread was never about DDO's even though he is confident in his ability to identify a DDO (notwithstanding the recent results of his own submission of purported DDO's); loco.

 

[ThePhiladelphiaPenny]

Well, this thread has been interesting to read.

Your coin I believe is strike doubled. I know that many have already informed you, but I will give you yet another definition. A strike doubled coin is when a die is slightly loose, causing it to hit the blank funny. That's the best explanation I can give. Meanwhile a truly doubled coin actually has doubling on the die itself from the die-making process. To confirm this however it would be nice to have an entire picture of the coin.

1964 Philadelphia dimes were not all proofs, (again, as you have already been informed). So you can get a reference to the difference, I will provide you with two links: This is an uncirculated coin, PCGS uncirculated 1964 10C, FB (Regular Strike) This is a proof, PCGS proof.

You can explore the images there to get a feel for the difference. It is also good to research the different kinds of strikes yourself.

Also, it would be beneficial to buy the Red Book of United States Coins. It can help you figure out which type of coin you have, the major varieties, and errors. Pictures of the coins, a price guide, the history of certain pieces and more.

Hope this helps! =)