2007 Malaysia 20c - Double Struck or a Fake?

[russellhome]

I saw this on eBay listed as a "Double Die". Doubled die... No. But double struck? It looked good to me, so I bought it.



Based on these photos, what do you think? Did I get taken for a sucker or is this truly double struck?

[diamond]

It's a genuine double strike.

[russellhome]

It's a genuine double strike.

Thanks Mike - that is what I wanted to hear. You did a lot to educate me with that 2007 Sac dollar experience and I gained a good understanding of what a double struck coin should look like. But still, I'm no expert and was not 100% sure. I thought about asking first - but I didn't want someone else to snatch it.

Now - I only hope it gets here. The coin will be coming from Malaysia and the seller seems to have a good reputation. So far, I only have a photo for my money-- but I figured for $20, it was worth the risk.

[diamond]

Actually, your double-struck Sac is very different looking from most double strikes, which is why I and everybody else had such a time figuring it out. I've never had a problem with these Malaysian gents. I've bought numerous coins from several different Malyasian dealers. It generally takes 3 weeks for a coin to arrive from there.

By the way, did you ever slab your double-struck Sac? It'll be interesting to see if those worthies agree with my diagnosis.

[russellhome]

No - I have not yet attempted to get the 2007 SMS Sac Dollar it slabbed as double-struck. I was going to try ANACS first - but with the move to Colorado and all those staff changes, I've had second thoughts. And after seeing the listing you showed me regarding Proof Presidential Dollars NGC slabbed as double struck, I think I'll try NGC first. In fact, I'll try and get it out the door this week.

I sent Fred Weinburg a link to the Coppercoins post and asked his opinion. He was not convinced and based on the photos, he opted to error on the side of caution. Wexler simply told me it was not his area of expertise. I sent the coin to Crawford - and he too would not call it double struck. Both said it was most likely Mechanical Doubling. But, IMO - the arguements given by these other coin pros was not based on what was seen on the Sac dollar - but rather - based on what they expected to see in a double struck coin (i.e. something like the Malaysian coin shown above). In other words - they told me why they didn't think it was double struck - but I didn't get a good explanation of how mechanical doubling could have caused this. And because they can point to cases of mechanical doubling where a few letters match the appearance of what exists all the way around both sides of the Sac dollar - MD as the cause is assumed by default. That's how I inturpreted their explanations, anyway.

I can't pretend to be expert enough to think I know better than anyone else. But as CD said in the Coppercoins post, I can't see how what happened to the 2007 Sac dollar could occur without a complete Down/Up/Down motion of the dies. Had it occured in a single Down/UP strike from a loose and rotating die, it seems to me there would have to be some smearing of the design on some part of the coin that never lost contact with the dies. But the Sac dollar has a crisp secondary image of the entire design (i.e. sharp corners on all the incused elements of the lettering and designer initials) all the way around both sides of the coin. So my point here is that the coin no better fit for existing explanations of MD than it is for what is expected from a coin double struck-in collar. So how can MD be the presumed cause?

I know the experts can disagree. I just had a 2000 nickel rejected as a DD by CONECA -- and I know it is listed by Wexler and Crawford. When I look at the coin, I can see both sides of the arguement. Plus, we all just witnessed the 2000 1c "Extra Beard" flip-flop by all the DV pros. So it is clear the coins appear from time to time that just don't fit the accepted norms.

What ever the case, the best I can hope for is that NGC will see that there is something very, very different about the Sac dollar and accept your explanation of "Double Struck with a weak second strike" as the most plausable explanation. I hope I'm not just bias -- but I accept your theory for what caused the doubling on the Sac dollar - and I'll just cross my fingers that NGC will as well. But in the end, it really does not matter. I know I have a very unique coin in my collection.

[diamond]

I recently acquired a second in-collar double-struck cent with strong rotation between strikes and a very weak second strike.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=280195811409

Each strike came from a different die pair, unlike my earlier example that I got from BJ Neff.

So you can point any of these questioning experts to precedents.

[russellhome]

Mike - you were right. It took about 3 weeks to get here from Malaysia. And only $3 to ship. What a deal. I had to get a map and see exactly where Malaysia was. Anyway - it is a nice error coin and at a nice price ($20). Here are some of my photos:









I have one more question... Technically, what would you call this error? I know it is double struck - and since it has a full reeded edge, the first strike was in-collar. Is the second strike considered an off-center broad strike? Also - the planchet is much thinner where the 2nd strike occured.

[diamond]

The second strike is an off-center strike. It looks thinner on-edge because the metal was flattened and expanded by the force of the strike. Without a collar to constrain it, a coin will expand beyond normal diameter, sometimes dramatically so.