Saturday, February 17, 2018

1988 with reverse of 1989 Lincoln Memorial Cent transitional die variety.

Near the end of 1988, there were several dies used to strike the reverse that were actually intended to be for the next year's run, 1989. These have become quite collectible and sought after. 1988 used the RDV-005 reverse design, but there were 7 dies that were RDV-006 and were used for 1988. There is a slight difference in the designers' initials. The RDV-005 is weaker, thinner and just plain boring in my opinion. The 1989 reverse has enhanced initials with a bolder look. The G is also quite different with a flared look to it. I have not found any in circulation, but I was lucky enough to have an online friend send me one as a thanks for the help and guidance I, as well as other admins of some Facebook groups have given him. I truly appreciate his gesture of kindness. Thanks Lakay! Also noteworthy, is the fact that the Cherrypicker's guide lists this coin in with the Wide Am varieties. This causes confusion to the newer collectors. The thing is, ALL 1988 cents were wide AM. The reason it is listed there is because of the reverse of 1989 variety. See pictures below. The first 2 pictures are from the Lincoln Cent Forum. The other 3 are of my own personal coin. I have also narrowed this coin down to have been struck by Die #4 stage B. You can find that info at varietyvista.com.http://varietyvista.com/01b%20LC%20Doubled%20Dies%20Vol%202/Memorial%20Reverse%20Design%20Varieties.htm  I also made a short video on my Youtube channel about this. Follow the link!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFO1QD4maHM&feature=youtu.be




2 comments:

  1. Thank you Christopher for sharing your discoveries with other coin enthusiasts like myself.
    I've been collecting for years. And I've learned so much since the inception of YouTube, Coin OPP,VistaView etc...
    I'm looking forward to seeing more of what to look for on coins thanks to you.
    Waiting for my microscope in the mail. Only then will I be able to compare them.

    ReplyDelete