Train wreck/1978 :) thanks all
4 4

240 posts in this topic

I believe his reference to the 43 nickel was that’s the S mint mark he thinks was used for the 842038400374940384960 mint mark strikes 

Edited by Woods020
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SlickCoins said:

I haven't a clue to be honest with you how anything gets made. I should watch that video instead of just reading and pictures.

What I mean is the penny pressed or impacted.

Thou I speculate both, to answer the question I think it was repressed to flatten the marks and the date stayed intact hints the bottom of the 7.

21-04-08 18:50:46.png

21-04-08 19:00:04.png

Man as I have suggested many times. Spend the time learning how coins are made vs this. Then you will realize how foolish this is. That’s what many people, in multiple approaches, are trying to tell you. Your theory is not plausible. And frankly no one wants to continue playing this game of I’m bored and want to get everyone fired back up with silly theories. Learn about coins then tell us all how we are wrong. Until then tired of seeing it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

No, it's below the D all together big Horitz S with the sarrifs unmistakable, down a full space of another mark "if" there was one there.

Edited by SlickCoins
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Well explain how we all got stuck with the mini S blob for 1978 that was used for 1974? I know I'm disappointed in the mark and I'm sure I'm not alone.

Thanks

Edited by SlickCoins
Link to post
Share on other sites

So since I don't know how it's made this is impossible?

I know I'm new but dang, to be that closed minded, wow takes it to a whole new level, I guess if it's not in a book of coins, that means this can't happen.

I'm lost please explain.

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SlickCoins said:

So since I don't know how it's made this is impossible?

I know I'm new but dang, to be that closed minded, wow takes it to a whole new level, I guess if it's not in a book of coins, that means this can't happen.

I'm lost please explain.

Thanks

Correct 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also I'm not saying anyone here is wrong or calling anyone names or saying their blind.

I'm here cause you all know a lot more than me hints where I posted, I'm learning, thou I see this all clearly.

This is new, I'm new

Thanks again

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, SlickCoins said:

Also I'm not saying anyone here is wrong or calling anyone names or saying their blind.

I'm here cause you all know a lot more than me hints where I posted, I'm learning, thou I see this all clearly.

This is new, I'm new

Thanks again

This is true. This is why you listen to the people that do know and keep telling you there is nothing there. That S is pareidolia. Looks like an s but it's not an s. There's no way for there to be an s there. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok maybe I’m being too harsh, and should try to help. Do two things. 
 

1. Research mechanical/machine doubling and compare to your coin. 

2. Research die erosion doubling and compare to your coin. 
 

if after truly taking the time to learn and objectively compare you think you are still correct come back and we can discuss it  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

So I'll research those two things, thou that changes nothing about the clearly raised big "S" silver nickel mark on said coin.

That S is one of my favs vs the 69, for it has such kick butt detail, straight lines on the end of the serif for the 43 and just the 69 by default is my fav.

Thanks again all

PS the big S is two mint marks directly below the D, also it is Horitz and some vertical, with clear serifs

Edited by SlickCoins
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, SlickCoins said:

So I'll research those two things, thou that changes nothing about the clearly raised big "S" silver nickel mark on said coin.

That S is one of my favs vs the 69, for it has such kick butt detail, straight lines on the end of the serif for the 43 and just the 69 by default is my fav.

Thanks again all

PS the big S is two mint marks directly below the D, also it is Horitz and some vertical, with clear serifs

I'm not wasting my time here no more. Everyone is trying to help you. There is no way no how.  Not any way possible during the minting process that there is an S there. It's called pareidolia. Just like looking at clouds and seeing faces and things. Tricks you eyes and makes it look like something is there but it is not. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SlickCoins said:

That's why we read the post

And yet, you went back and erased everything that you posted. Why did you do that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Take it to a coin dealer somewhere in person and they will tell you the same thing. And if they do agree with you then take it somewhere else cause they don't know what they are talking about either. 

Edited by Hoghead515
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Hoghead515 said:

I've been very confused ever since the beginning. 

[Me too, but as a self-described chiffonnier which our highly-regarded RWB was lightning quick to zero in on, my job is to pick up loose threads and weave them into whole cloth.  I was waiting for the right moment to suggest the 1978-D's mintmark was carefully outlined in black using permanent ink, but why introduce another variable to a thread supervised by an OP with such a pleasant disposition?

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, SlickCoins said:

That's why we read the post

I read the post, unfortunately it made no sense whatsoever.  I gave the benefit of doubt and tried to help but I am done, you are beyond help.  Send it to NGC.

Edited by l.cutler
Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again, how did the 6 “S” mintmarks get flattened during the minting process?  Do you think they could be random circulation marks?

Have you considered that some of the members could be very knowledgeable of the minting and die making process?  Is it possible that they’re telling you that this can’t happen at the mint is because they understand the minting process and know it can’t happen at the mint?  Or do you think everybody here is guessing?

Did you bother to try to do an overlay to show that the S matches the size and shape of those used on 1978 cents (proof only issue)?  Why not?  Even if you don't know the minting process, that is one way you can provide some data for your claim.  And there is a good chance you'll find out it doesn't match and understand that members have been trying to help you all along.    

On 4/9/2021 at 9:38 AM, Oldhoopster said:

You don't have to wait 20 years for technology.  It has been around for a while.  Go to www.Lincolncentresource.com and pull up the S mm style for 1978 Proof cents and make an overlay on your coin.  

 

Or you can keep up the "my coin looks different, I don't understand how it happened, so it must be a rare error" posts.  

This board has members with incredible numismatic experience and credentials and they are willing to help new collectors.  It's like having an MIT Professor helping you with your Algebra homework.  The sad part, is that you're throwing away that learning opportunity.  Even if you're truly interested in learning, you are likely on a lot of "Ignore" lists or considered a troll.  That's really a shame.  

Best of luck on your collecting endeavors.  I think it's time for me to bow out of this discussion

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't doubt if this ain't someone messing with us. Probably getting us all confused and revved up.  Sitting back laughing at us. Or another word is being a troll. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I did get my first S proof set 1978 with the 1974 S blob mark, just last week.

I actually hoped someone had great knowledge or has friends at the mint, for this truly did happened. Thou I could bring it and you'd say impossible cause the book of coins says so.

Yeah send it to the people who call others names and says it's impossible hmmm, yeah I'll pass.

Notice, how we are back to it can't happen.

Again I'm not a troll, then again you all probably think so cause I don't agree with you all.

All good

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SlickCoins said:

So I did get my first S proof set 1978 with the 1974 S blob mark, just last week.

I actually hoped someone had great knowledge or has friends at the mint, for this truly did happened. Thou I could bring it and you'd say impossible cause the book of coins says so.

Yeah send it to the people who call others names and says it's impossible hmmm, yeah I'll pass.

Notice, how we are back to it can't happen.

Again I'm not a troll, then again you all probably think so cause I don't agree with you all.

All good

 

It's not the coin book that says so. It's the minting process that knows so. If there is an S on there it was put on there after the minting process by someone. Didn't happen during the minting process. And if there is It's not an error. It's damage which makes it junk. Worthless.  Worth 1 cent. Which there is none there. You might as well let this one go. Cause no one on here is gonna agree with you. They have years of knowledge and know better. They know how the minting process works and knows there's no way possible. For that to happen someone would have to carve an S in the die that stamped it and it didn't happen. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SlickCoins said:

 

I actually hoped someone had great knowledge or has friends at the mint, 

 

These guys do have great knowledge. And know all about the mint but you refuse to listen to them. I think some may even have worked there or knows people who do. They study this stuff for a living. And write books about it. Ones that have answered your questions even. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, SlickCoins said:

So I did get my first S proof set 1978 with the 1974 S blob mark, just last week.

I actually hoped someone had great knowledge or has friends at the mint, for this truly did happened. Thou I could bring it and you'd say impossible cause the book of coins says so.

 

 

The same "S" mint mark punch was used from 1974 through the first part of 1979, so I don't know why anyone would say it is impossible for a 1978 proof set to also have that same mint mark.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

So yes we've accomplished this is just $0.01.

The big silver war time S mark, ok we have deciphered number uno, it's fake and or put on after.

Next pic I'll show you where the mint employee would've ruined the mint mark tool, of course speculation.

The one in white notice how the bottom of the S match's the mark by the 7.

This covered 3 more :)

Thanks again all

 

 

 

Edited by SlickCoins
Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you do the research and compare it to your coin as I suggested? Are you really wanting to learn or just keep speculating on fantasies? All of what you point to is explained through simple research if you want to learn. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also the S I think woods drawn for us under the D, is the 1979 S mark.

Yes I have the comparisons and the new MRIL's off the proof penny vs said impossible penny.

I know you all don't like the MRIL's so I've been keeping that on the down low.

I know I'm showing you all different years mint marks on this impossible penny=fake and or put on after.

I'll prepare comparisons.

Thanks again all

Link to post
Share on other sites

You’ve learned about mechanical doubling and die erosion? And objectively compared how those, plus maybe a circulation hit here or there, very logically may explain what you are seeing versus a very unlikely sequence of events? This is your chance to redeem yourself and show people you want to learn. Continuing to speculate without any knowledge base will prove you aren’t in it to learn. So think about that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like woods said. People are more than willing to help you if you are willing to listen to them. These guys on here are experts and are not gonna give you no false advice. I have learned a whole lot off them. When I first started I was saving coins with mechanical doubling and everything. Then I learned the difference between it and true doubling  and all sorts of other things. I am still learning things every day. But I listen to these guys and I don't argue with them. And when I'm wrong they correct me. That has helped me a whole lot. There are some very good teachers on here if you want to learn what they have to teach.  Good luck to you my friend. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, SlickCoins said:

Also the S I think woods drawn for us under the D, is the 1979 S mark.

 

Think about what you typed here.

You are suggesting that a mint employee used a mint mark punch from the future:whatthe:

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Just Bob said:

Think about what you typed here.

You are suggesting that a mint employee used a mint mark punch from the future:whatthe:

They really put some work into this. They pulled out one mint mark punch from 45 years earlier, and another a year in the future. I think the OP is not giving it enough credit. He thinks it was just a bored mint employee, but clearly there was premeditation involved. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
4 4