Well, I wouldn’t want to say 100% without seeing an EDS example in hand, which I haven’t. However, by the pictures it doesn’t appear to be from a digit. The 7 above the 8 is most obviously a digit, but the extra metal in the field is triangular shaped. Also, it doesn’t align with the 7 in a way that it could have been from the first impression of the date punch. However, the odd shape could be due to an attempt to polish it out.
Obviously, the die had to be reworked and I suspect that is when it sustained the damage. If a suspected MPD can’t be accurately overlayed with a digit, then it shouldn’t be called one in my opinion. I just noticed that Kevin’s comment on the OVD-001 was cut off on the webpage. I have fixed it, and I will paste his comment below. I’d have to defer to Kevin on this one, but him mentioning it as a die chip makes me wonder if he doesn’t think it is one. It may have been Larry Steve that advocated for the misplaced 1.
At any rate, a collector should look for an example with a strong 7 and pay no premium for the strength of the so called 1. If the 7 digit were never there, this would probably have never even been listed as a variety and the 1 in the field written off as a die chip or gouge.
Overdate: 8 over 7.
The upper right corner of the 7 can be seen above the second 8 on early die specimens.
Misplaced Date (in field above date).
The ‘die chip’ in the field above the date has been identified as the upper left corner from the base of a misplaced 1.
The upper right wing tip is disconnected. The upper left corner from the base of a 1 is seen in the field above the first 8 and 5.
Collecting Flying Eagle and Indian Head pennies never made more cents!
- This reply was modified 3 years, 1 month ago by Russ.