Thanks to messydesk for his thoughts...
Below find an analysis of the 1885 doubled 5s. The closest attribution appears to be VAM 10. There are problems with this attribution. But perhaps the subject coin may still be a VAM 10. All thoughts appreciated.
The ‘normal date’ doubled fives:
VAM 2: 5 in date doubled all across the top. Some specimens show a faint dash well below the second 8. Date set on right side of normal position tolerance.
Die Marker - Long, vertical polishing line near Phrygian cap ribbon.
1. Comes with and without long, vertical polishing line on Phrygian cap band as shown below.
The VAM 2 description indicates date at ‘right side of normal position tolerance’. However, the image of VAM 2 appears to be in ‘normal position’. Notice from the VAM 2 image, that the ‘5’ appears to be ‘closed’. See image of VAM 2 below.
The subject coin exhibits a ‘normal right edge’ setting and an open ‘5’. See images below. VAM 2 does not match subject coin.
VAM 6: 6 (revised) III2 6 - C3a (Doubled Date) (189)
Obverse III2 6 - All numerals in date doubled at very top with large shift. Tops of 85 showing in denticles as raised curved bar in single denticle space below right edge of 1 and straight raised bar below left 8.
Reverse C3a - Very slightly doubled lower edges of arrow feathers.
1. 1885-P VAM-6 has 85 in denticles on some specimens.
2. Do not confuse with 1885-P VAM-15, which does not have 85 in denticles and second 8 is not doubled.
3. 1885-P VAM-6 does have a C3d Reverse not C3a as listed.
4. Date Doubling is far more dramatic on the 1885-P VAM-6 than the 1885-P VAM-15.
The subject coin does not exhibit a doubled date, doubled arrow feathers or 85 in the denticles. VAM 6 does not match subject coin.
VAM 10: 10 (revised) III2 10 - C3a (Doubled 5)
Obverse III2 10 - 5 doubled across the top. Date set in the middle of normal tolerance. There is a small vertical mark on tenth denticle right of the neck index point.
Die marker - Some pitting at top and left outside of ear.
The doubling on the 5 tapers down from left to right and has a steeper cut on the outside top corner of 5 as shown by arrow on plate.
Date placement is different than that of the [[1885-P VAM-2] and 1885-P VAM-11.
Early specimens show the C3B reverse features.
The subject coin is set at ‘normal right edge, not in the middle of normal tolerance as stated in the obverse description of VAM 10 above.
However, the statement in the description that “Date set in the middle of the normal tolerance” appears to be incorrect as indicated in the analysis of the image of the VAM 10 shown below. As a result, the subject coin and the VAM 10 appear to be nearly identical as to the placement of the date.
The next statement in the obverse description of VAM 10 is that “There is a small vertical mark on the tenth denticle right of the neck index point.” The subject coin is absent this vertical mark as is the large Full Coin Photo.
Die marker-“Some pitting at top and left outside of ear.” Pitting is not present on the subject coin.
The subject coin 5 appears to doubled at at the top at first sight, but, viewed at the right perspective appears tripled at the top of the crossbar and at the 'patch' at the bottom of the crossbar. This is not indicated in the VAM 10 description.
It appears that there are some inconsistent descriptions of the VAM 10 and its images. The attribution of the subject coin to a VAM 10 seems to require additional unambiguous evidence.
VAM 11: 11 (revised) III2 11 - C3a (Tripled 5)
Obverse III2 11 - 5 in date tripled all across top. Date set to the left side of normal position tolerance.
Die marker - Long vertical polishing line at left end of Phrygian Cap ribbon.
The subject coin is set to the right side of normal position tolerance and does not exhibit a “Long vertical polishing at left end of Phrygian Cap ribbon.”, as indicated in the Die marker.
VAM 11 does not match the subject coin.
VAM 12: 12 III2 12 - C3a (Doubled 5) (188)
Obverse III2 12 - 5 in date doubled at top outside as a thin line set well above top of 5.
The subject coin does not exhibit a “thin line set well above top of the 5”. VAM 12 does not match the subject coin.
VAM 13: 13 (revised) III2 13 • C3a (Doubled 5) (189)
Obverse III2 13 - 5 in date doubled all across the top outside with doubling slightly stronger on right half.
Die Marker - Vertical polishing line back of Liberty head mouth.
The subject coin does not exhibit doubling across the top that is “slightly stronger on the right half”. In addition, it does not exhibit a “Vertical polishing line back of Liberty head mouth.”
VAM 13 does not match the subject coin.
VAM 14,14A: 14(revised) III2 14 • C3a (Doubled 5 Top Line, Thread Impression) (188)
Obverse III214– 5 in date is doubled at top outside as a thin broken line set very far above top of 5. Thin, curvy thread-like die impression below Phrygian cap ribbon.
The subject coin does not exhibit a doubled 5 “at top outside as a thin broken line set very far above top of 5.” It also does not exhibit a ‘Thin, curvy thread-like die impression below Phrygian cap ribbon.” The subject coin does not appear to be clashed (VAM 14A is clashed variant of VAM 14).
VAM 14, 14A do not match the subject coin.
VAM 15: 15 III2 15 • C3a (Doubled 18-5) (188)
Obverse III2 15 - 18-5 doubled in date. 1 doubled at top as a thin curved line. First 8 doubled strongly at bottom inside of lower loop as a thick bar. 5 doubled slightly at very top as a thin line.
The subject coin does not exhibit a doubled ‘18’ or a slightly doubled 5 “at very top as a thin line.”
VAM 15 does not match the subject coin.
VAM 38: 38 III2 34 - C3a (Doubled 5 Top ) (179) Proof
Obverse III2 34 - Slightly doubled top of 5.
Die marker - Diagonal polishing line in T of Liberty.
Reverse C3a - Slightly doubled bottom edge of lower arrow shaft.
Die marker - Tiny die chips in wing-neck gap
The subject coin is not a proof. VAM 38 does not match the subject coin.
VAMs 5, 5A, 23, 23A, 23B & 31 are all ‘far dates’ and are doubled at the bottom loop.
Thus, they do not match the subject coin.
Below find an additional image of the subject coin...