1958 D LWC RPM?

[PNWMAKES]

Thank you sir I will compare these tonight!

[eaxtellcoin]

Oh one other thing. This shows you there are at least 3 dies with very close position of the primary mintmark. Another reason the attributer would need a copy of the coin.

[eaxtellcoin]

I took my photo's in ""Auto"" that is why they look more grey. Sometimes easier to see markers..

Bob - Wexler is, from what I understand, over 100+

I looked at the 60+ I have. One close possibility is: W014 / IMM-049. Looks close in position but I'm not sure about the looks of the serif(s).
This coin would need to be overlaid to verify.

The second coin I have - I took photo's of mine is not listed by Wexler. It's in my un identified roll.
See if mine matches any of your markers. Notice the die scratches are different. Mine is an Early after the clash coin. If your clash is weaker the die may have been abraded to wipe out the clash. This is why marker photo's don't always help. Clash dies changes most marker's. You need to focus only on Mintmark Position.

This is also why an attributer would need a copy of the coin. So they can overlay the coin and look for very minor markers.. 1958-D-Un-Listed(01).jpg 1958-D-Un-Listed(02).jpg 1958-D-Un-Listed(04).jpg 1958-D-Un-Listed(03).jpg

[PNWMAKES]

thanks Bob

[mustbebob]

The person who would do your attribution is currently away on vacation. I will PM you the name and address so you can contact him in a couple of weeks.

[PNWMAKES]

Is CONECA currently taking submissions?

[mustbebob]

so I can imagine, they look forward to making some revenue of attribution fees to help administratively,

There is no administrative revenue made on attributions. The fees charged are paid directly to the attributer by the customer for his time/effort in looking at your coin(s). This trivial amount includes a lot including photographing and assigning a number and adding it to the files. Some times, (especially on coins like this one) that could take hours. Whatever he charges also includes return postage, supplies etc.
You can tell that this is all done for the love of and to help expand the hobby. I don't know a lot of folks who would do anything for 4 or 5 bucks an hour.

[PNWMAKES]

Great advice Gary I will set them aside until CONECA opens up there attribution service again.

[MintErrors]

Let's see if Bob chimes in. I do have two of these 1958's that are the exact. Again thank you Gary

---

No problem. We're here to help when we can. As for me, I know busy. I am over 60 and I too have a full time job that is packed with busy. In addition, I have three websites and a few other things to keep me busy the hours I am awake.

I'd take Bob's recommendation. I'd see if CONECA is willing to list it and if so, others will probably cross reference to it.

I personally am the type to where I will send it into my favorite place to get attributed, but I don't need to have it listed on 3+ websites and eat cost on postage, attribution fees and time, when one website is sufficient. That one site should tell me what I wanna hear, and I do not need to hear three-plus places tell me the same thing. If they want photos, I'll email them copies. No issues there. = )

As for Mr. Wiles, I have a similar thought process, but it boils down to this.... If I cannot show the customer a variety or error under the microscope and confidently show them the coin, it's probably too minor to list.

This is why I select CONECA for variety listings, because it is stricter on listings, and they tend to stay away from the minor stuff. BUT, the better stuff is drying up, so I can imagine, they look forward to making some revenue of attribution fees to help administratively, but I too am sure a lull in services, is welcome relief.

[PNWMAKES]

Thank you sir.....I also work full time and going to school again over the age of 50, getting my Data analytics degree. So take your time.

[eaxtellcoin]

I have alot of the Wexler listings but right now I just don't have the time to look. When I get a chance I will try to check the 55-D and this 58-D to what I have for Wexler. MAYBE i can help. Just be patient, with a full time job and my own website. I'm swamped..

[PNWMAKES]

Thanks Bob.

[mustbebob]

Your coin does appear to be listable. However, I can not tell you which one it is. This is a case where the forum would verify if it is a variety, and then you would need to send it in for attribution. Based on the thousands and thousands of varieties out there, this can not become a free attribution forum unless something is so obvious that we can figure it out pretty easily. In addition, we do not have the coin in hand, and as such, can not move it around and search for tell tale markers and such, nor can we compare it to others close by if need be.
Hence...the job of the attributer. You can contact whoever is the attributer at each site, and ask them if they can attribute it for you.
As far as the 'Too minor to list' label. Each attributer will have their own standards. I think that is perfectly evident by what Dr. Wiles lists versus Wexler and Coppercoins. Variety Vista only lists 23 RPMs for this date, coppercoins lists 89, and I don't even know how many are listed by John Wexler.

[PNWMAKES]

Well thank you Gary for your help. to quote Dr. Wiles

"Determining an RPM to be too minor to list is by its current nature a subjective evaluation. Since we are dealing with very small measurements, hundredths or thousandths of an inch, and most of us do not have access to highly sensitive equipment for measuring these small increments, no scientifically quantifiable and therefore objective measurement for evaluating an RPM to be too minor has been established. The first thing I look for are any markers that help me in distinguishing this RPM as a unique die. Most of the time the major marker is in the mintmark itself. Strength of doubling, direction of doubling, and position of the main mintmark relative to the design (usually the date though certainly not always as some mintmarks are on the reverse of the coin or positioned away from the date) are the most important elements. Secondarily, I look for die cracks, die chips, die scratches, die gouges, and die state on both sides of the coin. With all this information in hand, I make a subjective decision. Is it identifiable as a unique die? and would I buy one? If I can answer yes to both questions, I list the coin. If I cannot, I give it the dreaded, �too minor� label."

Let's see if Bob chimes in. I do have two of these 1958's that are the exact. Again thank you Gary

[MintErrors]

mustbebob might stop by. Prolly. For sure. Hehe.

The inner part of the mintmark on your coin just does not line up with anything on variety vista, coppercoins or wexlers website. The very last set of mint mark photos above, the third photo shows slight separation of the D's...to the southeast. That should have been enough to list this coin in my opinion.

so, IF it was ever seen by Mr. Wiles it should have been listed ? I am just saying, if it was seen, It's pretty obvious there is some separation. Odd that it is seems like it's not listed anywhere.
Let's see what Bob says about this particular RPM.