1891-S VAM-3 Die question

[keilg1]

Graded NCG 50 so expected scratches and wear seen, but I can't tell which die this might be. The polish line that distinguishes die #1 from #2 doesn't seem to align with what I thought was PMD on mine, but is raised and not scratched into the surface (as I originally thought).

Interesting, too, that the doubled eyelid and partial alligator eye mentioned and that I see is very similar to that of the 1891-O VAM-12 picture that @lured_in_again posted back in 2018:

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=4999&p=43291&hilit=1891#p43291

Clearly the VAM-12 is a far date, from a different mint, but wow don't they look similar?

Any 91-S enthusiasts out there with ideas of mine?

First: near date:

GR1893Sv3 near date.jpg (129.8 KiB) Viewed 5206 times

Next, doubled stars on left (but seen on all mentioned):

GR1893Sv3 2x stars.jpg (134.93 KiB) Viewed 5206 times

Next, doubled eyelid and alligator eye:

GR1893Sv3 2x lid-aligator eye.jpg (160 KiB) Viewed 5206 times

And on the reverse, the polish line on the left wing - much farther right than dies #1 and #2:

GR1893Sv3 polish line L wing rev.jpg (165.09 KiB) Viewed 5206 times

Finally, the illusive die #3 mentions an overpolishing of the berry above the second L of DOLLAR - I'm not sure I see anything to mention apart from the A (and possibly M) of AMERICA might be slightly weak...

GR1893Sv3 L berry rev.jpg (153.88 KiB) Viewed 5206 times

I can get other pictures if it might help, but I hope these 5 explain my stopping point.

Thanks!

Gary

[blh74]

On my V3 reverse, the line below the S is like your pictures. But it is confusing. Not like the page shows for die 2.

[keilg1]

On my V3 reverse, the line below the S is like your pictures. But it is confusing. Not like the page shows for die 2.

Thanks. Tentative confirmation I'm not seeing the Trust scratch masquerading as a polish line. Wouldn't presume this to be die #3, but most likely not #1 or #2.

Does yours have the cool eye and lid PUPs - and have you compared them with the 91-O? Looking forward to hear if there is a potential link because they seem a bit too similar to me to be pure coincidence.

Thanks, again.

[blh74]

On my V3 reverse, the line below the S is like your pictures. But it is confusing. Not like the page shows for die 2.

Thanks. Tentative confirmation I'm not seeing the Trust scratch masquerading as a polish line. Wouldn't presume this to be die #3, but most likely not #1 or #2.

Does yours have the cool eye and lid PUPs - and have you compared them with the 91-O? Looking forward to hear if there is a potential link because they seem a bit too similar to me to be pure coincidence.

Thanks, again.

Yes mine has the PUPS. And I don`t have a 91 O to compare with.

[keilg1]

On my V3 reverse, the line below the S is like your pictures. But it is confusing. Not like the page shows for die 2.

Thanks. Tentative confirmation I'm not seeing the Trust scratch masquerading as a polish line. Wouldn't presume this to be die #3, but most likely not #1 or #2.

Does yours have the cool eye and lid PUPs - and have you compared them with the 91-O? Looking forward to hear if there is a potential link because they seem a bit too similar to me to be pure coincidence.

Thanks, again.

Yes mine has the PUPS. And I don`t have a 91 O to compare with.

Appreciate the input. Mystery will remain until others can help. If recommended by the admins, perhaps a dual shipment to Leroy would be appropriate. Happy to ship mine if you'd do the same for him to see both in hand.

Love to see if @lured_in_again wouldn't mind sharing the 91-O, too, to see if it really is a coincidence.

Gary

[keilg1]

Update: Confirmed by LVA as a Die #3.

Confirmation of die #3 from LVA Nov 2021.JPG (21.99 KiB) Viewed 4893 times

The webpage says "Die 3 should become a revision of Die 1." but I no longer think this true? Perhaps some die #3s lose the line as the die ages?

[keilg1]

Thought this picture might help as it was what Leroy and I chatted about and he verified the placements:

1891-S VAM-3 3 different rev dies.jpg (66.46 KiB) Viewed 4858 times

[vamsterdam]

i have not studied vam 3 reverses enough to prove one way or the other but could any of these be different stages of the other with a different polishing line at trust? ie-a similar polishing scratch due to a repeating phenomena? could the original polishing line have been polished off, or worn off and another added?

[messydesk]

i have not studied vam 3 reverses enough to prove one way or the other but could any of these be different stages of the other with a different polishing line at trust? ie-a similar polishing scratch due to a repeating phenomena? could the original polishing line have been polished off, or worn off and another added?

Based on Leroy's pictures, die 2 could easily be a polished down die stage of die 1. I'd have to see all 3 in hand to have any more certainty than that, though.

[keilg1]

i have not studied vam 3 reverses enough to prove one way or the other but could any of these be different stages of the other with a different polishing line at trust? ie-a similar polishing scratch due to a repeating phenomena? could the original polishing line have been polished off, or worn off and another added?

Based on Leroy's pictures, die 2 could easily be a polished down die stage of die 1. I'd have to see all 3 in hand to have any more certainty than that, though.

Agree. Just reporting what was relayed. As I understand them, PUPs are simply those - not defining qualities but helpful hints. Not helpful all the time, but that helps make this interesting, no?

[blh74]

Here is my 1891 S. Vam 3, die 3.

A044 - 20211129_130447.jpg (179.09 KiB) Viewed 4803 times

A045 - 20211129_131013.jpg (141.29 KiB) Viewed 4803 times

[vamsterdam]

since i do not have any vam 2's to study, i will ask others to examine theirs to look for common or differing die markers, no matter how tiny they are. i have practiced this on 1879s, and 1878 8tf for years.

[keilg1]

Based on LVA's response and @blh74's contribution, is it possible to get a slot for die #3 in the SSDC register? Don't see one and want to register mine.

Thanks all,

Gary

[keilg1]

Revisiting this because I have a lot of coins heading to you, @vampicker. Would it be worth sending what LeRoy said was the 3.3 discovery coin to you to allow you to see it and/or get it labeled as such (if this is possible because it is already in an NGC holder). I can wait to send it to @messydesk because I'm sure I'll have more to send to him in the future.

If either of you would care to offer guidance here, I'd greatly appreciate it.

Gary

[vampicker]

Probably makes more sense to send the slabbed coin to JB unless you really want it regraded

[keilg1]

Probably makes more sense to send the slabbed coin to JB unless you really want it regraded

Brilliant - thanks!

If I have other ANACS slabbed coins that are not attributed but I want them to be, do I need to be charged for the grading fee (again) plus the variety service (assuming it'd be $12 for the ones I know - and $15 for the ones you need to research) or just the variety fee?

(Sorry for so many questions, but I want to get the shipment right.)

[vampicker]

No if they are graded, it's the reholder fee plus the verification or attribution fee

[keilg1]

@vampicker this information is greatly appreciated.

I hate to bother you but I still have more questions - hopefully these might prompt a bit of refinement of the descriptions of the submission process.

Am I understanding that the $12 verification fee is when we mark the VAM we believe a coin to be, it is verified and placed on the holder?

This contrasts with the $15 research fee when we do not know the VAM and/or we might have a discovery coin and you need to do a little extra work, thus the slightly higher fee?

Apologies for my slight confusion but this is the first time I've submitted to ANACS - but with the antics of the other grading services you can rest assurred that this will not be the last!

[vampicker]

That's correct. I typically will correct verifications anyway if the submitter has tried to be accurate