VAMWorld 2.0

There is currently a VAM 22 listed. Was what is now called VAM 1F EDS originally listed as VAM 22 before 2000? If so, what was the specification? Doubled/tripled reverse? If presented with the current 1F EDS, 1F1, 1F2 and the reverse is a doubled or tripled die, I might be inclined to renumber them ...

I would call it VAM 1F EDS, title it "Normal dies" and mention the scratches below the eye and the dies not yet beign clashed. Once we know what the die pair is, there's nothing to gain by labeling it ambiguously as VAM 1.

I don't see anything big enough here to list. At least one of those cracks would have to have something significant break off to get listed. "Displaced fields" in peripheral cracks are usually just die wear. Most should not have been listed, in my opinion.

UNCLE BINGO wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 17, 2023 7:08 pm

Jodemyer wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 17, 2023 5:19 am

Thankyou! @messydesk
I vote @UNCLE BINGO to do die study!

Pretty sure 110 die pairs would be a job for Superman or @fogie
and not this kid

"A journey of a thousand miles..."

You'll also learn a bit along the way.

There are two obverse dies for 1902-O Micro Os, so those could actually be VAM 96. The 96-O and 00-O only had one obverse paired with the Micro O reverse.

I've been approached by Winston Zack, who is the author of the "Bad Metal" series about contemporary counterfeits. He's in need of good full-coin pictures of the following from the Micro O family for his third volume, which will include silver dollars: • 1893-O VAM 9 • 1894-O VAM VNA-B • 1896-O VAM ...

keilg1 wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 17, 2023 8:36 am

Awesome sauce...

To confirm, though: @messydesk, you do not need me to send mine to ya?

Correct. This mystery has been solved.

The obverse pictures on the VAM 24 page were all VAM 105, so I removed them from the VAM 24 page. I added the clear picture of the chip inside the upper loop of the 8. I may add a couple more. VAM 24 has the earliest reverse of 24, 10, and 105.

A little more digging and Brent's 80-S labeled VAM 24 is actually VAM 105, cataloged with the C3q reverse of VAM 10. It was discovered in 2013 by one Brent Fogelberg. I'm going to change the reverse name of VAM 24 to C3q to keep it consistent with VAMs 10 and 105.

I have Brent's and Jody's coins in front of me at the moment. It actually looks like Jody's is VAM 24, and not Brent's. The VAM book clearly shows the chip that is in the top of the upper loop of the first 8. The reverses of the two coins are the same, with Brent's being later die state. It also app...

This happens a lot on coins through 1883. Post the mint mark and the wing-neck gap polishing line detail and we'll get a lot closer.

Yeah, I need to work on those pages. There are some 21-S pages I need to rework as well. I tried to write the specification so that the pictures wouldn't really be necessary to tell the stages apart. Line through the D with no radial crack is 3BQ3, with radial crack 3BQ4.

As far as I know, milk spots that have been seen on ASEs and other mint products are permanent and are a result of improper planchet preparation. The APMEX rounds may spot for the same reasons, but I haven't heard anything specifically about them.

RE: "Yeah, whatever it is, it's definitely funky, interesting and mysterious. I don't recall seeing anything like that anywhere else aside from the similarity to the acid treated reverses. Maybe one day @RogerB will surface some sort of correspondence regarding it." Additional San Francisco Mint do...

Still plenty of room in this submission if you're interested.

Doesn't ring a bell. Cracks aren't well documented for 21-S yet, so from here it's just another 21-S with a die crack.

Never realized Philadelphia produced any coins in 1878!! Are any of them worth collecting? lmao The Funky Feathers always refer to the San Fransico Mint. Now I need to reevaluate everything I ever thought I knew about Morgans. I now know that I know Nothing!! Thanks for raining on my parade. I bet ...

vampicker wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 12, 2023 12:04 am

Apparently I liked the piece better in hand when I saw it almost 14 years ago

The image on the Wexler site is more clear than the CPG pic
http://doubleddie.com/1429840.html

Indeed, it is.

I would label this as VAM 1F1 EDS, noting that the breaks aren't yet fully formed.