VAMWorld 2.0

Ties the top pop in the SSDC census. It's also on my 2013 list and set. Great find!

It's the second use of the VAM 9 obverse, so any claimed proof is mistaken in the most charitable reading. This marriage does exist in a PL stage however.

If you encounter a Peace Dollar that actually does have a different style of numeral in the date, that's a good coin to stay away from. But I agree with John, they look the same

I'd say the Peace Dollar Red Book done by @RogerB . I'd also suggest looking at images of examples from the Heritage Auction archives

You are welcome, and it is well deserved

By the way, the 3 volume set by Rusty Goe covers every date for every CC issue, but doesn't dig into varieties in any depth,

There's a long history of questions that got real answers from a 'poke it with a stick' reply

Doug Winter Numismatics site says copies are available for sale, but no price is listed.

https://raregoldcoins.com/blog/dougs-bo ... -1870-1893

The original VAM 2 listing was generic. It's for an unremarkable coin beyond having the 'Medium O'. Sure - it could have been called Medium O set slightly left like the VAM 51 listing. You'll note VAM 51 already had one duplicate listing that had to be killed off. Van Allen didn't plate anything but...

PMD, the sliver in the mintmark opening will move if you poke it with a stick

If you're just after info on the Carson City gold issues, Doug Winter's book 'Gold Coins of the Carson City Mint' is the standard reference.
Rusty Goe's three volume set is excellent and covers pretty much everything

Here's a pic of my example. Not seeing the marks.

I had published a long article titled "A Brief History of the Morgan Dollar' that was hosted by the ANACS site for years. Sadly, it was lost when the site was changed a few years ago. Some of you may remember reading it. The story about using melted Morgans to coin rupees was part of it.

and a thank you back at cha!

The biggest thing that bothered me is this looks deliberate rather than a product of random chance. But that doesn't mean it's fake. If it is a deliberate clandestine mint product, it would have been made for a collector. That goes a long way in explaining how the two pieces stayed together. Still n...

probably should tag @fogie so he actually sees this before the thread gets buried. It's a small circle of folks that would actually care about this

I'll go along with that WB-2 does look like a good match. Having a known die pair on this thing goes a long way with authentication. Still have reservations but they are not as strong now

Like I said, can't put my finger on it. But just because I'm suspicious doesn't mean it's bad. I'm supposed to react to the extraordinary with skepticism.

I can't put my finger on it, but something about this piece bothers me. I'd suggest matching it to a listed marriage before sending it out.

http://www.lsccweb.org/BillBugertBooks/ ... -Part2.pdf

'Bisecting die break' is typically how you'd see this described. Great coin!