1953 Lincoln Cent maybe DDR?

[Cocozen]

Hi! I'm fairly new to Coneca and have been looking at coins for about a year now. Today I looked at this 1953 under the scope and would like to know what you think about possibly being a DDR or MD. Thank you for any help or advice you can give me. I tried looking for examples but I can't find any. It's not in the best shape... Thanks in advance!


0115-33.jpg
0115-32.jpg
0115-28.jpg
0115-27.jpg
0115-24.jpg
0115-23.jpg

[MintErrors]

I like to approach this in a semi logical manner, so lets break this down and show references along the way. It may help in the final decision on the attribution of the coin.

First thing I like to do is go to this website:
http://varietyvista.com/

That lists most of the attributions done by James Wiles. Some may say "rpm" but it may also have some ddo (doubled die obverse) and ddr (doubled die reverses) listed within that category.


Looking under the The Lincoln Cent Doubled Die Book Vol. 1: 1909-1958
http://varietyvista.com/01a%20LC%20D...%201/index.htm

Specifically under DDR listings for the year of 1952, there is one listing;
http://varietyvista.com/01a%20LC%20D...DDR%201952.htm

An additional resource can help as well:
www.coppercoins.com

Click the link for Die Variety Search
Put in the year of the coin in the top box only. Check the box whether the coin is P D or S and hit "submit search".
with that being said, the coin in the listing about is no where near noticeable as yours. So that in itself, can be a tell tale sign towards it not being a DDR.

With your coin, when I look at the way the devices (letters) are on the coin, it looks like machine doubling. Over a period of time, the sharpness of newly cut dies degrade after hammering thousands if not hundreds of thousands of coins. Worn dies tend to shift when striking a planchet leaving that doubled effect. I've notice over the years that the effect machine doubling and die wear produces is at a lower level than what a doubled die would produce. Typically if it is a DDO or DDR, most of the times the doubling will appear at the same height of the letters, or make the letters and devices seem thicker.

I always try to rationalize with area I am looking at. If I see an area that's a suspect DDO or DDR, I try to think about the spreading of that I am looking at, and imagine the distance that should be about equal in distance from one letter to another.
this example might be a BIT extreme but it punches home the fact that DDR's typically show at the same or close to the same height. Before the mid 1990's the DDO's and DDR's were created when the working die was pressed once, taken out, examined and then, if it was not detailed enough, the die was pressed again to add more detail, if it wasn't lined up exactly, the doubled die effect can be clearly seen.

I agree, your coin is in pretty rough shape, but to me, it looks like a extreme worn die, probably a LDS (late die stage) die, almost at the end of its life. The "T" in cent looked promising but it wasn't enough to push me over the edge.

The Variety Vista site might have more examples of a DDR for the wheat cent reverse. I will admit, most of the DDR's in the wheat cent era didn't appeal to me much unless I seen a significant spread and it was a no brainer to me.

Plenty of examples of DDR's out there and how they look about the same height
http://www.lincolncentresource.com/d...1968Dddr1.html

http://www.lincolncentresource.com/d.../1982ddr1.html

If you have any questions, feel free to ask.

[MurrcuryDime]

can you get a reasonable pic of the whole coin, not sections.

[Jamez]

Looks like a very worn out die to me based on those photos.

[MurrcuryDime]

there does appear to be a uniform directly south machine shift if the edges of the lower left stem and the T show close-to-identical double. I imagine the super smooshy spot of the machine double is almost immediately at 12 o'clock., the super smooshy spot that's all rounded at the pressure point of the die pivot as it shifts is always a great indactor of machine vs hub doubled. this is not to say that both machine and hub doubling cannot be present at the same time, just an indicator of which details belong to which (class?). Don't judge my technical terms, haha, correct them kindly.