Misattributed

I've been searching ebaY for 1999 Type 2 Lincoln Cents (the ones with
the Proof Reverse, 'A' and 'M' of America separated) and this is the
first one I've seen listed in quite some time:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...category=52 4

The problem is that it's wrong. ;-/

That's not the Type 2, not as it appears on my 6 examples. (1 1998, 3
1999, 2 2000)

It's wishful thinking.

But it does at least open the door for me to note something, that the
width of the 'AM' on 1999's *does* vary slightly, normally. This is
from my observation only, so grain of salt, your milage may vary, etc
etc.

I've diligently searched for these for 36 months now, and when it
occurs, there's no doubt of it. The A practically looks like a
different font, the space is a real gap, not the small 'at least it
doesn't touch' that this auction shows.

I know because:
A: I have the three other examples to clearly compare the 1999's with.
B: I've noticed some normal variation in the 1999 that often makes me
linger, or pull out my examples for comparison.

The 1999 Lincoln reverses like this seller is offering can be explained,
as least I explain them to myself, as varying degrees of die wear or
strike angle. My True Type 2 (all caps...I'm getting religious about
these) is not as small a difference as the auction above illustrates.
At that magnification, there's a true gap, not the smallish gap shown
between the leg bases in this auction.

The seller does not show the secondary diagnostic at all. On Type 2's,
Gasparro's initials are closer to the Memorial than on the business reverse.

Alan
'seller's eyes'

Alan & Erin Williams wrote:

My True Type 2 (all caps...I'm getting religious about
these) is not as small a difference as the auction above illustrates.
At that magnification, there's a true gap, not the smallish gap shown
between the leg bases in this auction.

The seller does not show the secondary diagnostic at all. On Type 2's,
Gasparro's initials are closer to the Memorial than on the business reverse.

Sorry for the quick re-tag, but I meant to include the reference to Ken
Potter's site, which displays the differences with great clarity.

http://koinpro.tripod.com/Articles/_..._Varieties.htm

Alan
'grateful to Ken'

I agree with you. I recently went on retirement disability
and have partially searched a plastic 10 gal cooler bottle
of 90's decade cents I had been accumulating there. I have
noticed this partial separation on numerous coins but never
had the wide separation posted on numerous sites. There
must be several die varieties.

wrote:

I agree with you. I recently went on retirement disability
and have partially searched a plastic 10 gal cooler bottle
of 90's decade cents I had been accumulating there. I have
noticed this partial separation on numerous coins but never
had the wide separation posted on numerous sites. There
must be several die varieties.

Somewhere on line I've seen a listing of Lincoln Reverses from the last
15 or 20 years defined by letter...I think it ran 'A to H or G'. (?) I
suppose it's possible that multiple reverse die designs get into single
year production runs, but the variation in 1999's I've seen, while
noticeable, is minute. I've assumed it is due to die wear, but there
are other, better-informed RCC posters that could speak to that
definitively.

Alan
'copper inspector'