1898-P far date?

[keilg1]

As I look at the described varieties, there are only near, normal and slanted (normal) dates - but none listed as far. Might have some slant to it, but none of the slanted dates are (apparently) as far.

Do I read the date placement correctly as far? If not, none of the other pictures look to be 'as far' as this one. No other discernable PUPs that I can see that'd help identify a relationship to other dies.

Can't even say someone removed an O or S mintmark because none of those mints produced far date coins either, right? (No scratches to suggest otherwise... I'm just letting my creative detective mind go wild... .

A headscratcher, but it doesn't take much for me to reach that state.

Thanks,

Gary

FCO.jpg (256 KiB) Viewed 866 times

FCR.jpg (256 KiB) Viewed 866 times

[Mike7E]

This looks like it is at RE3 LE5 that is at the extreme of Normal Date.

[DurhamJnKY]

Have you looked at 14?

[keilg1]

Thanks, @DurhamJnKY.

Mine looks even a little further right. I can't make out the doubling of the 8 but the 14 was a good start and might prove to be it in the end.

Here's a low resolution of the date but more up close:

1898-P far date up close.jpg (58.54 KiB) Viewed 854 times

[LateDateMorganGuy]

Couple of ways to look at this.

The date is in the normal position, albeit right within normal. Personally, I wouldn't even call it far right within normal.

That being said, as a normal date and no other listable markers, I would call it a VAM-1.

But, with 5.9M coins minted and only 14 base VAMs listed, it could be a candidate for a new listing, even if it is VAM-1 Die Pair 1.

[keilg1]

Thanks @LateDateMorganGuy. That's one of the many things I love about this subjective hobby: what is normal in one series is not normal in another; what is slanted in one isn't in another; but all of them are somehow attractive and I want them in my set...

#I'mnotanaddict

[blh74]

In the VAM book Leroy has only three dies listed as near date.