2016 D Lincoln Penny Issue

[CommunicatorDan]

Hello my fellow coin collectors,

I have this 2016 D lincoln Penny that seems a little odd. I was told on another site that this may have been a result of someone using a vice and pressing something into the coin.

I saw another post in this forum from a different member that posted something similar. So I wanted your input on this coin.

If you notice on the obverse near Lincols ear extending up towards the 10:00 position it seems to be a partial image of the shield on the reverse

On the reverse is looks as if the die may have the edge partially imprinted.



Thanks

[occnumis2021]

vice, hammer etc with another coin(s).

[CommunicatorDan]

Thank you, I guess if it leaves an indented impression it would be PMD?

[MintErrors]

Thank you, I guess if it leaves an indented impression it would be PMD?

---

---

Its quite more complicated than that.

Some of the tell tale things to look for are

Damage to the rim.
Damage done to only the highest areas of the coin.
Lack of super high pressure.
Lack of details.
Smearing of the coin which show little to no details
Examine both side of coin to see if the orientation of the impression is the same.
Damage may show the vised coin imprinted backwards.
Use of two different denominations.
Use of two different years
Use of two different designs

There is a lot more. It depends on the way the attempt was done. Like anything else one has to examine the coin, research the info and understand the minting process for the era the coin was originally made. From there an opinion can be formed whether its a bonefide error or, a garage experiment.

For errors a good site is......

Https://error-ref.com

The completed entries is an outstanding reference.

[CommunicatorDan]

Thank you Gary, I do use err-ref.com quite a bit. Sometimes the double die portion of the site is confusing. They have pictures of DD that almost looks shelf like as if it was machine.

I do love reading up on things so the site has been very helpful.

[MintErrors]

Thank you Gary, I do use err-ref.com quite a bit. Sometimes the double die portion of the site is confusing. They have pictures of DD that almost looks shelf like as if it was machine.

I do love reading up on things so the site has been very helpful.

---

---

Doubled dies can be cofusing for some. I have written a lot of posts on here about the subject.

https://board.conecaonline.org/forum...uestion-please

One thing to note as to not confuse those of us seasoned collectors ;

Doubled dies, re-punched mint marks, over mint marks, repuched dates, over dates and mis-placed dates are considered varieties. Just about everything else may be an error like:

Broad strikes
Clipped planchet
Indent
Incomplete punch
Lamination
Mis-aligned die
Multi-strikes
Off-center
Struck through
Wrong planchet
And a lot more...

A decent website to read up on doubled dies is https://doubleddie.com
I suggest reading in the area called worthless doubling. John Wexler did a good job in comparing a doubled die to some worthless doubling types.

http://doubleddie.com/144822.html

The biggest take away for doubled dies is that the working dies which have doubling have more than one impression sunk into the working dies. That was done to ensure the image of the design was sufficient to transfer the coin image onto the coins. When its sunk into the die, its raised on the coin. If you look closely at the Lincoln cent doubled dies of 1955, 1958, 1969S and some of the 1972 DDO's the doubled die portion is at or near the same height. On doubleddie.com, John shows some excellant examples, even ones with cookie cutter lines which is one impression overlapping the other.

Machine damage is usually lower and the affected areas appear to be thinner. Its difficult at times, but trust those reliable resouces. If it is a DDO/DDR then it should match known examples. The doubling shown on documented examples dont move. The description usually helps a lot.
Happy hunting.