78S V-43 die 1 and die 2 mix up

[lewisr2]

I was looking in the SSDC registry and noticed that the 78S VAM-43 now has a die 1 and die 2.
I thought that was strange because the description and pictures by Leroy Van Allen had 43 die 1 as the new revision and that die 2 is the original 43.

78S V-43 die -- pictures.jpg (115.92 KiB) Viewed 2176 times

From the pictures above the V-43 die 1 is the revision and the V-43 die 2 is the one with the polishing in the loops of the first 8 of the date.
I looked at the census for the die 1 and die 2 -- die 1 has 35; die 2 has 2.
It appears that the census numbers for 78S VAM-43 die 1 and die 2 are reversed. I assume that when the VAM-43 was changed to die 1 and die 2 that the die 1 got all the VAM-43 that were then in the registry. The die 2 are probably really the new die 2.

If you agree then how should this be handled?

[vamnuke]

Another hole!!

[vamnuke]

Hopefully, folks will read this, look at their coin(s) next opportunity and update the database. Similar confusion was seen before in the V80 V89 saga and whenever a letter suffix is assigned.

[lewisr2]

I think that the VAM-80 and VAM-89 mix-up is still reflected in the SSDC Census numbers.
The V-80 lists 26 examples, 25 in MS and 1 PL. The V-89 lists 26 in MS.
It is my experience that I see quite a few V-80 and only have seen a couple V-89,
I think that what will happen is that the "new" VAM-43 die 1 will be entered in SSDC as a die 2, since the census is so small it looks like it would be a more recent discovery.
John Baumgart knows the difference since he VSS slabbed my discovery die 1 as a die 1.