GBrad Posted October 1, 2020 Share Posted October 1, 2020 Going to just post this one pic for now. I’d like to see opinions as to whether this looks to be an 005 or 006. I’m sure some of the pros on this forum already know my reason for just supplying this one photo for the time being. I think it looks an awful lot like a 005........ please look closely as you can maybe see where the top of the G looks to be smashed from maybe some PMD thus not allowing a “straight” line to be drawn from the leg and upwards. I don’t see any resemblance of a defined lower extended leg on the G nor any serif. It’s a long shot but who knows..... Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenstang Posted October 1, 2020 Share Posted October 1, 2020 Would have liked to see the whole coin but I'm sure you have a reason for not showing it as you usually show complete pictures. With the top of the "G" being damaged and not extending out and the looks of the "F", I will say that it is an 005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coinbuf Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 I cannot see any evidence of the G having taken a hit in this photo. At this close I would expect to see metal "piled up" somewhere after being moved from the hit and I'm not seeing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Bob Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 Unless I am missing something, that is a 005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GBrad Posted October 2, 2020 Author Share Posted October 2, 2020 Now that three of my favorite professionals have commented... (and there are many more of you guys and gals that I truly appreciate for all of your help!!!) here is my dilemma....... I found these FG designer’s initials on the reverse of a 1989 Lincoln Cent, not a 1988. This was as close up of a pic that I could take. I ordered a new scope yesterday just for this cent (which I took the original pic with) and will no doubt use it in the future. I am perplexed at how these initials got onto the reverse of a 1989. Please now see the photos of the entire coin. If I am missing something here by ALL means please let me know. I am very familiar with the 88 with a reverse of the 89 FG but after researching this oddity I have come up with noting except “it does not exist.....”. By no means am I trying to create “something that does not exist” but this one really caught my attention. As always, thank you all for your input. -Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Modwriter Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 2 minutes ago, Greg Bradford said: Now that three of my favorite professionals have commented... (and there are many more of you guys and gals that I truly appreciate for all of your help!!!) here is my dilemma....... I found these FG designer’s initials on the reverse of a 1989 Lincoln Cent, not a 1988. This was as close up of a pic that I could take. I ordered a new scope yesterday just for this cent (which I took the original pic with) and will no doubt use it in the future. I am perplexed at how these initials got onto the reverse of a 1989. Please now see the photos of the entire coin. If I am missing something here by ALL means please let me know. I am very familiar with the 88 with a reverse of the 89 FG but after researching this oddity I have come up with noting except “it does not exist.....”. By no means am I trying to create “something that does not exist” but this one really caught my attention. As always, thank you all for your input. -Greg Nice!👍 GBrad 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GBrad Posted October 2, 2020 Author Share Posted October 2, 2020 2 hours ago, Coinbuf said: I cannot see any evidence of the G having taken a hit in this photo. At this close I would expect to see metal "piled up" somewhere after being moved from the hit and I'm not seeing that. Not sure on the missing metal at the tip of the G as you stated, very good observation might I add. Maybe a partially filled die on that portion?? You may be able to see in this pic where the top of the G would have extended. I unfortunately had no choice but to clean this coin (I know this is NOT an acceptable practice!!) in order to get a better recognition/view of the details of this Lincoln. Not to get off the subject here but...... I think I stated earlier in one of my previous posts that I use green Listerine “cool mint” mouth wash with an extremely soft towel to take away the crud and green corrosion from my Lincoln Cents. It has worked extremely well for me and so far I have seen that it causes no damage to the luster or the coin itself. Just FYI for those Lincoln collectors that just can’t see through the grimy green crud that plagues so many coppers as well as zincs...., BUT PLEASE..... DO NOT TAKE MY CLEANING ADVICE, especially for newcomers, as coin cleaning is not recommended!!!!! By all means, if you would like, try it out on a less than spectacular coin (bad choice of words because all U.S. coins are spectacular!) and make your own determination. I take no responsibility for any damage to your coins from my above stated comments ....... just saying..... Thank you Coinbuf for your comment and observation, very much appreciated. -Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Modwriter Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 Do NOT ever clean your coins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GBrad Posted October 2, 2020 Author Share Posted October 2, 2020 5 minutes ago, Modwriter said: Do NOT ever clean your coins. I know and totally agree....... that’s why I told everyone else not to do it......😁. But.... there are some occasions when you have a green crusted Lincoln that you have no idea what lies behind the crud. That’s the ONLY time I will attempt to remove the grime on a coin!!! And ONLY on a Lincoln to see what lies beneath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GBrad Posted October 2, 2020 Author Share Posted October 2, 2020 Hi to all once again. I have been researching this coin and the extremely remote chance of this thing actually being a variety. I came across a website that spoke about some other determining factors (somewhat confusing to me to be honest) associated with verifying if this coin is in fact an 89 with a reverse of an 88. Unfortunately, that thread ended without showing a decision as to its validity. Would anyone on the forum like to expand on some other key elements that I should look for to determine if this is legitimate? Or would it just be best to send it in for attribution and if so, who would you recommend? Thank you. -Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenstang Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 After stating it is an 005 and seeing that it is on a 1989 Lincoln, I have been doing a little research to prove myself wrong. From what I can understand, about 10 years or so ago it was thought that this was a variety (005 on 1989 cent) and it may have even been on Variety Vista. After much discussion, Dr. James Wiles, a Coneca attributor claimed that this was caused by die abrasion that caused the 006 to look like an 005 and it is no longer listed.. If you were to send it in for attribution, it will just come back as being caused by die abrasion. I picked this info up from reading bits and pieces of other discussions about this so it is not something new but has been hashed about for quit a while. Hoping that someone else can add something to this posting as I had never heard of this before and am interested in what other members take on this is.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GBrad Posted October 3, 2020 Author Share Posted October 3, 2020 3 hours ago, Greenstang said: After stating it is an 005 and seeing that it is on a 1989 Lincoln, I have been doing a little research to prove myself wrong. From what I can understand, about 10 years or so ago it was thought that this was a variety (005 on 1989 cent) and it may have even been on Variety Vista. After much discussion, Dr. James Wiles, a Coneca attributor claimed that this was caused by die abrasion that caused the 006 to look like an 005 and it is no longer listed.. If you were to send it in for attribution, it will just come back as being caused by die abrasion. I picked this info up from reading bits and pieces of other discussions about this so it is not something new but has been hashed about for quit a while. Hoping that someone else can add something to this posting as I had never heard of this before and am interested in what other members take on this is.. Hi Greenstang and thank you for your extra research into my coin, much appreciated. I too have since found some of the info you are relating to, maybe even the same information. I completely understand die abrasion and polished dies and this process can no doubt cause a host of frustrating issues. But, from my knowledge regarding die abrasion and polished dies, there should be at least some type of visible evidence: lines, striations, grooves, etc.... (whatever you would like to term them) showing where the die was abraded or polished. I myself have been fooled by over polished and deteriorated dies in the past, namely the Jefferson I posted not too long ago. I accepted the fact and moved on. However, and by no means would I ever dispute world renowned experts, I simply cannot see any evidence of die abrasion on this Lincoln especially in the area of the designer’s initials. The fields on this coin are very good for its age, very little PMD if any, and the devices are still very robust, especially the bottom of the reverse. The top of the reverse does show some signs of possible DD and/or polishing but the FG area is still very questionable and is original in my opinion. As zoomed in as the pic is that I posted, showing the perfect outlines of the FG, the location of the letters and their size and orientation, and then the added fact that under this type of high magnification there is not ANY minuet visible or discernible extended leg on the G, or even a remote resemblance of an 006 serif on the G......... Well..... it just makes makes me wonder....... I will add that you, and so many other informative members on this forum, have really helped me out. I sincerely appreciate your replies Greenstang! I too wouldn’t mind if another member or members... would comment on this topic. I may be way off base here with my “newbie” mind (man I hate that label.... lol) but I just can’t see how die abrasion would cause this on this particular coin. AND.... WITH ALL DUE RESPECT (as I know this is an open forum worldwide) I would never dispute Dr. Wiles professional expertise regarding his opinion on variety coins. Enough said...... Thank you again! -Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coinbuf Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 Interesting coin and discussion, I do not have an further info that what Greenstang was able to find. It seems to be an oddity and debunked variety, Might be worth putting into a 2X2 and holding on to in case this gets revisited and changed in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonnieR131 Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 I agree with Coinbuf, an oddity to hang on to, and labeled explaining exactly. Just curious Greg, was that mint mouthwash with or without fluoride? I'd have cleaned him up and made him smell good as well. Nice find. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GBrad Posted October 3, 2020 Author Share Posted October 3, 2020 19 minutes ago, ronnie stein said: I agree with Coinbuf, an oddity to hang on to, and labeled explaining exactly. Just curious Greg, was that mint mouthwash with or without fluoride? I'd have cleaned him up and made him smell good as well. Nice find. 2 hours ago, Coinbuf said: Interesting coin and discussion, I do not have an further info that what Greenstang was able to find. It seems to be an oddity and debunked variety, Might be worth putting into a 2X2 and holding on to in case this gets revisited and changed in the future. Good suggestion Coinbuf. Who knows, maybe this oddity will resurface in the near future. Hopefully sooner than later. I will continue to research this Cent to see if there’s anything else I can come up with. If so, I will gladly post it. To date, this is the best oddity of a Lincoln I believe I have found and obviously I want to pursue it to its fullest extent. Thanks! Mr. Ronnie..... what can I say......😂. Definitely fluoride....as breath that old can be somewhat offense and the teeth... well... that’s a different story..... hahaha. Thanks for both of you guys posting. Definitely will hang onto this Linc. Take care. -Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
