Page 1 of 1

Another 1900-O duplicate (imo)

Posted: Sun Feb 16, 2020 2:11 am
by UncleGildy
After a limited response to the VAM44 = VAM-2A duplicate query, I'm a bit reluctant to suggest this one, but what the hey...

Check out the VAM-40 and then review VAM-21 in the 1900-O series.

I added a comment to the v40 page: "Looks like a duplicate of 1900-O VAM-21. Check polishing lines in tail feathers and wheat grains. Also note the spike at upper left of 'I' in PLURIBUS. They are all identical."

I own what I tagged as a VAM-40 (ANACS MS63, NAOH, 6242070) until tonight, when I realized the die markers match the 21 as well. Mint mark and date placement match as well, even though they are listed differently. IMO the mint mark is very high and the date is near. Both are close enough that it's easy to see them specified either way (high vs. very high and near vs. normal).

Re: Another 1900-O duplicate (imo)

Posted: Sun Feb 16, 2020 9:15 am
by ChiefRet.
Interesting, but I would need to see your examples.

Re: Another 1900-O duplicate (imo)

Posted: Sun Feb 16, 2020 4:35 pm
by UncleGildy
Thanks for weighing in Chief. Yeah, I know how coin in hand makes all the difference. Especially since doubling in the inside of ear or the polishing lines need to be viewed at an angle with lighting angles varied and all.

My coin has every marker on both coins, most significantly, the ear doubling on inside and the two scratches in the Ear.

The Ear scratches are not visible in either of the two large full coin photos (LFCP) of the VAM21, or VAM-40 for that matter. What is visible in all LFCPs for both VAMs are the polishing lines in the wheat kernels, cap-to hair, LIBERTY, etc. on the Obverse. And on the Reverse, the polishing lines in the Neck-Wing gap and Tail Feathers match exactly.

I would think they must be the same dies, with only possible difference being the goofy little pair of polishing lines in the ear. I bet the VAM-21 has the ear doubling, but who knows when the two polishing lines (scratches) entered the picture.

I guess I never considered the fact that the two die scratches in the ear may warrant a separate VAM designation. But with everything else being the same, I have to wonder about the VAM-21 and the VAM-40. They sure seem like the same die pair to me.

Here are the areas I've been referring to (no contrast adjustments made). I tried to keep VAM-21 is on the left/top. Adjusting contrast a little or referencing the other LFCP will prove the point even more, but I didn't want to be guilty of altering the evidence.

Remember, these photos were taken on difference coins with different lighting by different people years apart.
21-40_Grains.jpg (33.68 KiB) Viewed 551 times
21-40_LTF.jpg (17.31 KiB) Viewed 551 times
21-40_EarHairCap2.jpg (66.37 KiB) Viewed 551 times
21-40_NWG.jpg (21.44 KiB) Viewed 551 times
21-40_LIBERTY.jpg (70.24 KiB) Viewed 551 times

Re: Another 1900-O duplicate (imo)

Posted: Sun Feb 16, 2020 9:37 pm
by Bigbub
The 1900 O VAM 40 is not a VAM 21, but some VAM 21's have similar reverses. However, the listed VAM 40A is a relisting of the VAM 21B.

Re: Another 1900-O duplicate (imo)

Posted: Sun Feb 16, 2020 11:38 pm
by UncleGildy
Thanks for the response Bigbub! May I ask (other than the text in the classification) what distinguishes the two VAMs from each other?

The LFCP and die markers seem to indicate they are the same Obv and Rev die. Why isn't that the lock it seems to be from the side by side photo comparisons of 21 and 40 above?

The only difference I can find is the ear. It looks like the 40 dies are simply the 21 dies with the ear doubling and scratches added. And I bet the ear doubling is there on the 21 as well.
However, the listed VAM 40A is a relisting of the VAM 21B.
Do you mean the 40A used to be listed as 21B, and some shuffle took place? Both are still out there, and I can't find any comments about history or relisting. - confused :?

Re: Another 1900-O duplicate (imo)

Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2020 12:35 am
by Bigbub
The VAM 40 has a very high O, higher than all other 1900 O coins if you look closely enough. The vertical ear gouges as described appear on no other 21 family coins. The VAM 40 also has an exactly perfect near date placement over the second and third denticle gap and the date itself is placed high with no slant whatsoever. Some coins also have an unlisted minor die crack across the lowest hair v above the date.

The Vam 40A was listed a few years ago, but I have a specimen with all the VAM 40 attributes with a completely different clashing placement. The listed VAM 40A looks exactly like the VAM 21B. I was clued into this by another Vammer a few years ago and finally found that piece and the VAM 21B to compare. Both listings are still current.

By the way, you are right about the VAM 44. I missed that post but will comment on it too.

Re: Another 1900-O duplicate (imo)

Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2020 1:58 am
by UncleGildy
Ah! Thanks for the helpful reply. I also noticed the date and crack in the lower hair-vee, but kept quiet as my rambling was already long enough :)

What still gets me a bit, is the date placement of 21B (and 40A I guess?) - the placement is near, but with a slant, and the '1' maybe being a little low. I avoided mentioning the 21B because of the date - it seems the VAM-21 is the only one of the 21 family to have a straight, high, near date.

I had a hunch you were the 1900-O study. I've become obsessed with the series and really appreciate all your hard work. Thanks :!:

Re: Another 1900-O duplicate (imo)

Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2020 8:37 pm
by Bigbub
Thanks, I chose the 1900-O series to work on because my uncle gave me a 1900 O/CC dollar when I was 8 years old and I still have it. But the series is far from complete. There are other duplicate listings. I was able to unwind the VAM 14 VAM 14A VAM 35 VAM 35A VAM 41 VAM 41A mixups a few years ago after much hard work and time spent looking for examples, not to mention help from other vammers. Since then my vamming time has been limited by births, deaths, illnesses and fiduciary restraints. I still look when I can. I'll send you a PM with some other observations I've made.