Merc Dime Doubled Date

I recently acquired a 1942 Mercury Dime, about MS 65/66 FSB. Under
10X magnification, I can clearly see a doubling of the date. Is
anyone aware of this variety? Is it a well-known type? Worth any
premium over the normal FSB?

Thanks for any insight,
Joe

Joe wrote:
I recently acquired a 1942 Mercury Dime, about MS 65/66 FSB. Under
10X magnification, I can clearly see a doubling of the date. Is
anyone aware of this variety? Is it a well-known type? Worth any
premium over the normal FSB?

Thanks for any insight,
Joe

Here to give my usual "holiday mood" response.

No, no, and no.

Before I answer the question, a few questions must be answered. The
most important probably refers to machine doubling vs. actual doubling.
In machine doubling, the doubled image is usually somewhat flat. In
actual doubling, the doubled image usually is an exact duplicate in
terms of strike as the original image.

Furthermore, the value of doubling greatly depends on the ease of
seeing the doubling. Most of the valuable ones (e.g. the 1955 and
doubled die cents) are valuable because the doubling can easily be seen
by someone with normal vision with a magnifying power of less than 5x.


If you have to ask and you are somewhat familiar with coin collecting,
it's not a well-known type.

Mike

Thanks. I am relatively new to collecting, but I've grown quite fond
of the hobby. I may have this piece professionally graded, as it
looks (to the untrained eye) to perhaps be a 42/41 D strike, but it
is not as pronounced as some of the pictures I have seen. The
doubling is clear under lower magnification as well, and it is is a
true, double struck date on the die, not a double machine strike of
the coin.

Of course, I'm not naive enough to really think I'm sitting on a MS65,
FSB 42/41 D Merc dime! If I were, it would be worth many, many, many,
many, many times more than what I paid for it. But, looking at the
type of doubling, I just can't help but think "what if?"

BTW - Even if it's only worth 20 bucks, it's a beautiful coin and I
love it!

Joe


On 22 Dec 2004 16:02:37 -0800, wrote:


Joe wrote:
I recently acquired a 1942 Mercury Dime, about MS 65/66 FSB. Under
10X magnification, I can clearly see a doubling of the date. Is
anyone aware of this variety? Is it a well-known type? Worth any
premium over the normal FSB?

Thanks for any insight,
Joe

Here to give my usual "holiday mood" response.

No, no, and no.

Before I answer the question, a few questions must be answered. The
most important probably refers to machine doubling vs. actual doubling.
In machine doubling, the doubled image is usually somewhat flat. In
actual doubling, the doubled image usually is an exact duplicate in
terms of strike as the original image.

Furthermore, the value of doubling greatly depends on the ease of
seeing the doubling. Most of the valuable ones (e.g. the 1955 and
doubled die cents) are valuable because the doubling can easily be seen
by someone with normal vision with a magnifying power of less than 5x.


If you have to ask and you are somewhat familiar with coin collecting,
it's not a well-known type.

Mike

Machine doubling damage is very common on the dates for the entire Mercury
series. MDD is damage to the struck coin so it has a negative effect on value.
Getting the coin slabbed will be a waste of money.
Alan Herbert
The AnswerMan

So you have said before but not everyone agrees with this opinion and
some do pay more for such coins.

The amount of time it took to create an error coins does not come into
it, for me.

To me if an error happens inside the mint it's a legitimate error coin,
and possibly worth a premium, if outside the mint it's not a legitimate
error and would be worth face only. Billy


AnswerMan2 wrote:

Machine doubling damage is very common on the dates for the entire Mercury
series. MDD is damage to the struck coin so it has a negative effect on value.
Getting the coin slabbed will be a waste of money.
Alan Herbert
The AnswerMan

To me if an error happens inside the mint it's a legitimate error coin,
and possibly worth a premium, if outside the mint it's not a legitimate
error and would be worth face only. Billy


Billy, you're about 30 years behind the times. The vast majority of minting
variety collectors have long since recognized the final impact of the die pair
as the end of the minting process, not when the coin goes out of the mint gate.
There has been a longstanding effort to discredit my research by one or two
people in the hobby. I'm disappointed to see you parroting their line.l

Is the doubling caused by the dies striking the coin?

If yes, then it's an error coin.

If no, but it's caused by a die manufacturing error then it's a variety.

Both are collectable.

I'm parroting no one as these are my own opinions, it's nice to know
that I'm not alone. Billy


AnswerMan2 wrote:

To me if an error happens inside the mint it's a legitimate error coin,
and possibly worth a premium, if outside the mint it's not a legitimate
error and would be worth face only. Billy


Billy, you're about 30 years behind the times. The vast majority of minting
variety collectors have long since recognized the final impact of the die pair
as the end of the minting process, not when the coin goes out of the mint gate.
There has been a longstanding effort to discredit my research by one or two
people in the hobby. I'm disappointed to see you parroting their line.l

From: answerman2

Billy wrote:
To me if an error happens inside the mint it's a legitimate error coin, and
possibly worth a premium, if outside the mint it's not a legitimate error and
would be worth face only.

The vast majority of minting variety collectors have long since recognized
the final impact of the die pair as the end of the minting process, not when
the coin goes out of the mint gate.

Here you have the two schools of thought.

On one hand, the stand that a coin's value is "what you can sell it for" might,
to a limited degree, support Billy's position.

On the other hand, the position that educated expertise has a better view of
value tends to make more sense.

To me, the question is not "what can one get for this coin today", but rather
"which coins will be recognized as valuable 10 or 20 years from now". Those
will be the ones woth my attention.

Consider the "colorized" 1997 SAE, which sold for $45 back in 1997. Experts
warned back then that they were only worth about $7 - $10 each. Today, if you
tried to sell 10 of them to a dealer, you'd be lucky to get $100 for the lot,
silver prices notwithstanding.

Conversely, coin experts suggested the purchase of proof commemorative Dollar
coins in 1997, whereas the more cavalier collectors considered such coins as
"overpriced". Now, premiums of such coins are quite extended.

What makes an error coin is the question, and the proof will rest in the
long-term value. Even though you might have been able to sell a "colorized" SAE
in 1997 for $45, the experts said they were "altered coins", and so now they
are.

Too, here we have an expert outlining the "Numismatic Definition" of a
collectible error, and I must subscribe to that definition.

That is not to say that one couldn't sell a FFD (Flat-Field Doubling) or a MDD
(Machine Damaged Doubling) coin for a premium, in the current market. I have
proven otherwise. I still have one of the 1999 SBA Dollar Proofs with the FFD
"error" on the reverse; the others I had have since been sold.

I do not know what the remaining one will sell for. If I tried, I might get the
$300 I expect, or I might get $3, I don't know. And, that's the clew. I don't
know if it will reap a substantial amount or just a trickle. If it were a
"recognized" error, I could be confident on it's sale price.

For those who are not in the hobby for the asthetics of it, there is the
indicative validation. If a coin "might be" of little worth in the future, then
it lacks the intrinsic value which is inherent to a valid "error coin".

Thus, as much as I would like to see a change of attitude toward FFD & MDD
coins within the expertise of numismatists - and error experts in particular -
for the time being, I must support and respect Mr. Herbert's stance.


8-|
- Coin Saver

"Coin Saver" wrote in message
...
From: answerman2

Billy wrote:
To me if an error happens inside the mint it's a legitimate error coin,
and
possibly worth a premium, if outside the mint it's not a legitimate error
and
would be worth face only.

The vast majority of minting variety collectors have long since
recognized
the final impact of the die pair as the end of the minting process, not
when
the coin goes out of the mint gate.

Here you have the two schools of thought.

On one hand, the stand that a coin's value is "what you can sell it for"
might,
to a limited degree, support Billy's position.

On the other hand, the position that educated expertise has a better view
of
value tends to make more sense.

To me, the question is not "what can one get for this coin today", but
rather
"which coins will be recognized as valuable 10 or 20 years from now".
Those
will be the ones woth my attention.

Consider the "colorized" 1997 SAE, which sold for $45 back in 1997.
Experts
warned back then that they were only worth about $7 - $10 each. Today, if
you
tried to sell 10 of them to a dealer, you'd be lucky to get $100 for the
lot,
silver prices notwithstanding.

Conversely, coin experts suggested the purchase of proof commemorative
Dollar
coins in 1997, whereas the more cavalier collectors considered such coins
as
"overpriced". Now, premiums of such coins are quite extended.

What makes an error coin is the question, and the proof will rest in the
long-term value. Even though you might have been able to sell a
"colorized" SAE
in 1997 for $45, the experts said they were "altered coins", and so now
they
are.

Too, here we have an expert outlining the "Numismatic Definition" of a
collectible error, and I must subscribe to that definition.

That is not to say that one couldn't sell a FFD (Flat-Field Doubling) or a
MDD
(Machine Damaged Doubling) coin for a premium, in the current market. I
have
proven otherwise. I still have one of the 1999 SBA Dollar Proofs with the
FFD
"error" on the reverse; the others I had have since been sold.

I do not know what the remaining one will sell for. If I tried, I might
get the
$300 I expect, or I might get $3, I don't know. And, that's the clew. I
don't
know if it will reap a substantial amount or just a trickle. If it were a
"recognized" error, I could be confident on it's sale price.

For those who are not in the hobby for the asthetics of it, there is the
indicative validation. If a coin "might be" of little worth in the future,
then
it lacks the intrinsic value which is inherent to a valid "error coin".

Thus, as much as I would like to see a change of attitude toward FFD & MDD
coins within the expertise of numismatists - and error experts in
particular -
for the time being, I must support and respect Mr. Herbert's stance.


8-|
- Coin Saver


Okay then. But would you also say that if a semi-valuable coin (e.g. a 1928
Peace Dollar or a CC Morgan Dollar) has MDD or FFD, it would decrease the
value of the coin?

Mike

Is the doubling caused by the dies striking the coin?

No

If yes, then it's an error coin.

If no, but it's caused by a die manufacturing error then it's a variety.

It's not.


The problem is that a strike requires two dies. MDD is caused by one die
bouncing or chattering on the struck coin. Thus is it not a strike. It is
accidental damage to the already struck coin.
Alan Herbert

Obviousy it is not caused by the die manufacturing process. The root cause is
wear, which allows the die and die holder to move about after the pressure of
the strike has been released.
Alan Herbert