The reverse dies of GVI pennies - a reappraisal

[PWA 1967 1,841]

1 minute ago, RLC35 said:

 

Are you saying the difference between the sngl and dbl is the "width" of the lower step?

 all getting confusing Bob ......look at the waves on Terrys four pictures No 3 they touch the ex as in Davids pictue B in the first thread.

They merge in and flat rather than rounded and a gap 

[davidrj 194]

Wow! I seem to have stirred the pot, no bad thing

I share everyone's frustration with the 1940s. I have a heavilly circulated "single" that I've been trying to upgrade, having bought several which looked good on the pictures, all turned out to be "double" - I couldn't understand why the double exergue was so obvious to see on later coins but not on 1940; 1944s were not on my radar due to the date spacing difference.

So I started looking to see if other pointers existed and came to the conclusion, to my satisfaction at least, that die C is only used for late 1940 and early 1944, and may be regarded as a transitional stage between B and C* (my D)

David

[RLC35 288]

17 hours ago, PWA 1967 said:

 all getting confusing Bob ......look at the waves on Terrys four pictures No 3 they touch the ex as in Davids pictue B in the first thread.

They merge in and flat rather than rounded and a gap 

 

Like I mentioned earlier, it would be nice if someone had a high quality single example to post. Most of the one's that people say are sngl, really look just worn and not really different, to me. Michael Gouby mentioned to me once that looking at the step from a 90 degree angle would make it clearer...but I still have not seen that much difference. Maybe I wasn't meant to see one! Ha,Ha.

[scott 129]

bottom one is single.

[RLC35 288]

1 hour ago, scott said:

bottom one is single.

 

Thanks Scott. Can you make a close up of just the step and wave, of the two? 

[secret santa 2,015]

Note how bottom of waves merge with the single exergue but are clear of the double exergue

[PWA 1967 1,841]

Good pictures Richard 

Notice the Step as you call it Bob ,on the single its more like a bar rather than two lines.

More easy to spot when you have seen one a couple of times.

[alfnail 756]

I attach some exergue line pictures which I believe confirm what Richard has posted, one attached to this post and another to follow on immediately, both from UNC pieces.

[alfnail 756]

....and both are 1940's by the way

[Nordle11 564]

Haha everyone's at it, all of you've posted since I started doing one too. Here are mine anyway, single on top in both pictures.

[bhx7 222]

Looking back at mine now after seeing Matts and Ian's close ups I feel a lot happier as I was starting to have a few doubts about mine. Now I can look at them and know I have both the SE & DE and both are good examples of the 2 types. Its amazing how easily a small doubt can creep in. Normally I am very confident on my coins and identification but this was just one of those times!!!!

[davidrj 194]

But the C* 1944 has two clear raised lines

[RLC35 288]

6 hours ago, secret santa said:

Note how bottom of waves merge with the single exergue but are clear of the double exergue

 

Is this a single? The coin is AU, so it is a pretty good example, if it is. Thanks to all for the help and the great pics.

[bhx7 222]

2 hours ago, davidrj said:

But the C* 1944 has two clear raised lines

Mine are identical David. The C* is so much more defined and stepped where the standard C definately merges more in with the Exergue. So it is not just the movement of the last 4 but also the recutting of the waves and also a new cut exergue. Definately gives a need to reassign a new reverse, giving reverse C for F227 & F229 (1940DE & 1944) then a new reverse D for F229(*) to F242 (1944*-1951).

Thanks David. Love learning new things and getting a chance to re-evaluate my collection.

[Nordle11 564]

11 hours ago, RLC35 said:

 

Is this a single? The coin is AU, so it is a pretty good example, if it is. Thanks to all for the help and the great pics.

Yes that's a single

[RLC35 288]

25 minutes ago, Nordle11 said:

Yes that's a single

 

Thanks Nordle.....

[secret santa 2,015]

On 9/2/2016 at 11:25 PM, davidrj said:

But the C* 1944 has two clear raised lines

I've just been re-photographing my coins with a fixed aperture of f16 to get sharper focus and I've checked out my 2 1944 specimens. It does appear that the waves on the version with the 4 central to a wave does have more deeply engraved waves, although it may simply be a sharper strike. Certainly, Dave's pictures above do feature quite a worn specimen of the 4 to the left of a wave.

[secret santa 2,015]

And the feet of the 4s in the 2 coins are definitely different.