1982-D 1C Bronze RPM-001 MAD

[Shleppodella1]

Penny posts are a dime a dozen......I know.
But this bronze-bomber (3.11g) is just so purdy and so it gets a shout out. And
also I hope this presentation somewhat redeems myself and keeps everyone in there chairs and off floor (KETCOF)
YES, I know the last one was something shall we say "to be undesired & done by a 2nd grader".

[MintErrors]

In my opinion, this is not a match and this is why.

The varietyvista example shows the lesser rpm to the North.
I believe the mintmark on varietyvista is slightly more east than your example.

The "hole" of the mintmark might look like the same, but I believe it's very different.

The example you present shows what I believe is split plating, the blue colored area, outer area of the mintmark from south to east.

Mintmark position is vital when trying to attribute the rpm's. Overlays are a great way to ensure one has a match. Looking for diagnostics like the "hump" north of the primary mintmark is key.

[eaxtellcoin]

1982_D-RPM001.jpg
Hello Shleppodella1,
Gary is correct, the coin is not an RPM - sorry.
What you are seeing inside the primary "D" is the punch has deteriorated to the point a piece inside is missing.
RPM001 is defined as what you see to the North. BTW it's copyright infringement to use someone elses photo's without written permission.

I will shoot a photo of my copy - once my camera batteries charge.

[Shleppodella1]

I do ❤️ this forum and it's people. It really does TRY AND TEACH AND GOES OVER-N-BEYOND (which is unheard of nowadays).

Cool thank you again and dully noted.
Believe it or not I was actually thinking it might be zinc plate splitting beings it is the year they changed over from bronze to zinc. Plus I've posted similar one's like this before and have received the same reply, so now I know for sure. And wasn't sure if it was one of the damaged punch ones on Wexler's when posting but now that you guys have confirmed again I won't be posting anymore of these kinds.

"May I please ask" what photo I infringed upon I don't want to make the same mistake twice?
The one that is labeled "my magnified MM" is mine of course and the other is from Variety-Vista screenshot. So am I not allowed or supposed to post pictures like this one from the research website(s) and just have people look them up themselves because "I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION" that the poster is to do the homework/legwork and supply quality photos so that the veterans/pros [Uz guyz] DON'T have to and can simply just evaluate the post/thread and give your veteran/professional feedback and then move on thus allowing you to answer more questions/threads because your time is valuable and we are the "green-one's" learning the process here that's why we paid to join the club correct?

FYI...
"not trying to be lippy just making sure I'm learning correctly here because of the time invested on me here so honestly thank you"

[eaxtellcoin]

Hey Shleppodella1 again.
If you use Dr. Wiles's photo from Variety Vista or Dan Griffins photo from Wexler's website or copy the photo from Coppercoins then you need to ask Dr. Wiles, Mr. Griffin or Mr. Daughtrey if you can use there photo's.
My advise:
(1) reference the variety you think it is - You did this correctly.
(2) show a photo and leave an arrow where you see the double die or in this case RPM, you did part of this.
The folks viewing the post will try to help, alot of folks view the forums - someone will answer.
I would hope that folks would help if they know the answer, and respond graciously.
I think alot of folks do not respond because there either not sure, or don't want to make a mistake.
Making mistakes is learning. I take and have taken my bumps. I also like an explaination, like most folks do. With a bit of detail.
Alot of times I do NOT respond if i'm un sure.
I hope this helps.
Eric

[Shleppodella1]

It does help alot and thank you for taking the time to explain believe it or not it's actually shaping me for the future! I do sooooo love this hobby and the people on this forum.