First Known States Quarter Doubled Die Reported ...

[Die Varieties]

Numismatic News Article By Ken Potter

[cpm9ball]

Billy, it's interesting that the coin believed to be a doubled-die is supposed to be the result of tilted hub doubling. The explanation given in that article is the same theory that I espoused for my CA quarters. What do you think now?

 

Chris

[Die Varieties]

Billy, it's interesting that the coin believed to be a doubled-die is supposed to be the result of tilted hub doubling. The explanation given in that article is the same theory that I espoused for my CA quarters. What do you think now?

 

Chris

 

Can you show me some pics?

[cladking]

Great detective work. This one probably won't have as much demand as some other states' varieties but should have a stiff premium even after all 250,000 are finally found.

 

Now it's time to check some of the doubling on the obverse periphery for the same effect.

[XpipedreamR]

The mystery of the extra tree solved

[HaydenTubbs]

The mystery of the extra tree solved

 

 

yep

[cpm9ball]

Billy, I just got that Digital Blue QX5 Computer Microscope and I'm not sure how good the photo will be. The uppermost edge is the actual edge of the wing. The edge from the field curves upward as it should, and it also curves upward from the doubled edge. If this were the result of machine doubling, it would have flattened it slightly or there would be signs of a scraping motion (if the die had jumped around) from the outer edge to the inner edge. I think this was the result of tilted hub doubling that occurred when producing the working die.

 

 

Chris

[Die Varieties]

Billy, I just got that Digital Blue QX5 Computer Microscope and I'm not sure how good the photo will be.

 

Chris -- if I remember correctly since it's been a while, didn't I examine one of these you sent me? And after examination of your coin, I concluded it was mechanical doubling?

 

If it is -- then I stand by my analysis of your coin. Chris, I wish I could say it was a doubled die, but the flat, shelf-like damage is a result from the die slightly bouncing upon striking which caused the shearing of various portions of the design that gives it an appearance of being a doubled die.

[cpm9ball]

Billy, I just got that Digital Blue QX5 Computer Microscope and I'm not sure how good the photo will be.

 

Chris -- if I remember correctly since it's been a while, didn't I examine one of these you sent me? And after examination of your coin, I concluded it was mechanical doubling?

 

If it is -- then I stand by my analysis of your coin. Chris, I wish I could say it was a doubled die, but the flat, shelf-like damage is a result from the die slightly bouncing upon striking which caused the shearing of various portions of the design that gives it an appearance of being a doubled die.

 

Billy, the problem is that it doesn't appear to be flat and shelf-like, and is similar to the explanation given in the article beginning with the 6th paragraph that starts with 2)........and continues with the 7th paragraph.

 

Chris

[Die Varieties]

"Billy, the problem is that it doesn't appear to be flat and shelf-like, and is similar to the explanation given in the article beginning with the 6th paragraph that starts with 2)........and continues with the 7th paragraph."

 

Chris -- I must respectfully disagree. Your coin is totally different from what is in the article written by Ken Potter concerning the 2005-P Minnesota quarter.

 

From my in-depth, 3-D examination of your coin under a stereoscope at various magnifications from 7x to 40x, there is no problem. I just got through telling you in the above post it is flat and shelf-like on your coin from my analysis.

 

You sent the coin to me for examination and my professional opinion. I examined your coin and gave you my professional opinion.

[cpm9ball]

"Billy, the problem is that it doesn't appear to be flat and shelf-like, and is similar to the explanation given in the article beginning with the 6th paragraph that starts with 2)........and continues with the 7th paragraph."

 

Chris -- I must respectfully disagree. Your coin is totally different from what is in the article written by Ken Potter concerning the 2005-P Minnesota quarter.

 

From my in-depth, 3-D examination of your coin under a stereoscope at various magnifications from 7x to 40x, there is no problem. I just got through telling you in the above post it is flat and shelf-like on your coin from my analysis.

 

You sent the coin to me for examination and my professional opinion. I examined your coin and gave you my professional opinion.

 

..................and I have the utmost respect for you!

 

Thanks, Billy.

 

Chris