Thread: Questions about errors I've found working in a bank

What little I know about coins comes from my childhood. My grandmother collected them from the mid twenties until now and a part of her obsession rubbed off on me. Though I stopped collecting coins around the age of 9 (am now 39), I continued to collect in general. My forte is actually Pokemon cards where I am recognized as an expert.

Now that I work at a bank (a sloooow bank at that), I've come across more than a few errors and would like to know more about them.

This half dollar is the first. As you can plainly see, it has a huge lump on the left side of the coin which makes it about twice as thick on that side as on the other.

The next is this 1999 penny. it has a die break(?) in Lincolns forehead that looks like a throbbing vein in his head. Though a bit hard to see by the scan, it is readily noticed in real life. The line matches perfectly to the hair line that is the edge of face/beard from about the top of the ear to the bottom of the tragus.

Another is this '85 which has "In God We Trust" stamped on a portion of the rolled edge.

This D Buchanan, whose condition is pretty sad, has a double stamped edge strike. Sorry, don't know how to get a good scan/photo of the edge. I'm posting the image only so you can get an idea of its condition. It looks like (basing this off how I've read that the edge strike is done) the first time it went through Schuler machine, it may have been set wrong and left a very weak strike. In fact, all I can find is one star and some unintelligible (to me at least; I'm sure some of you would have no problem deciphering it) lettering that's under a strong struck "UNUM". The coin was passed through with opposite sides up as the one star is pointing the opposing direction. I read that there has been one Buchanan found with a smooth edge, but I can't find any mention of Buchanans which are double struck on the edge. I found this one today.

A '90 D that never made it to the copper bath apparently. It was the first error I found. I found it in a roll of dimes we got from Brinks and I was more than happy to take the 9¢ loss to buy it!

I also have a 2000 Sacagewea with Rainbow toning that's about 1/8" wide and which stretches from the "Y" in Liberty to the papoose she's carrying the child in, a Pierce dollar with an odd vertical line struck between two of the stars on the edge, as well as a 1997 penny with a double ear.

What I would like to know is what kind of value would these coins have? Where could I have them evaluated? Would it be worth having any of them graded? I could really use some help in other words!

Can you get a pic of the reverse of the Kennedy?

If you visit http://conecaonline.org/, there is a link for "attribution service" where you can send the coins off to be evaluated.

But I'd wait until you get some feedback from others.

And check out this link for your "zinc" penny: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_g_ml...feature=fvwrel

Welcome to CT!

Thanks, and gladly.



No lines to follow there either, but you can see it wasn't just punched from the reverse. In fact it has a bit of a bulge on the left side between the wing and "UNITED".

Just tapped on this one and it sounds hollow. What could cause that?



I figured out how to scan the edge of the Buchanan. The extra star is centered between the M and the star. Maybe someone can make heads or tails of the mess between the "U" and the "M"? I know I can't.

Uploaded a better image of the weak star.

As to the zinc penny, it doesn't exhibit any qualities of a coin that has been chemically altered. It's legit. If it weren't, the reverse would be riddled with areas of copper around the lettering and tiny details as the water tension would have trapped minute pockets of air in those areas not allowing the chemical reaction to take place. It also wouldn't be shiny. This doesn't come from the vast amount of coin collecting knowledge I DON'T have, it comes from doing that experiment in chemistry class over and over in high school and college.

Help... please

Welcome to CoinTalk! I can't help, so... bump.

I think the half was in a fire. I had some that were in a house fire and they had bulges where the clad had separated from the copper core. I'm no expert so lets see what the experts say!

I don't see any coins worth a premium here. The one 'unplated' cent looks like a post-mint plating and I'm not totally sure whats going on with the Buchanan dollar. The Kennedy is damage and the two cents have defects which are minor and common. JMO Keep lookin' though!

As mentioned the half is post mint damage. On the first cent die cracks on Lincoln's head are not uncommon. The 1985 D is a form of die deterioration. It is also common and if you keep an eye out for it you will find plenty of them. The 1990 D does not look legitimate to me. I suspect post mint plating. look by the last A in America and you see what look like bubbles that are frequently seen under the copper plating on regular cents. You would not see that on non-plated zinc planchets. The porous appearance of the coin is also not a good sign for a non-plated zinc cent.

The dollar may have possibilities. I can't tell exactly what is going on but sometimes coins do go through the edging machine twice. But it will either take a lot better pictures or seeing the coins in hand to tell what it is.

Thanks for the info Conder. A few follow up questions if you'll entertain them.

The 1985. To my understanding, aren't the planchets run through a machine to give them a uniform width rolled edge around the coin before being struck into a penny? If you look at the enlarged picture and compare the width of the edge, the top edge is much thinner than the bottom edge and if you complete the circle from the width of the bottom edge to the top it correlates perfectly with the raised area where the "In God..." is printed. How is that die deterioration? Wouldn't that be an off center strike? Not that I'm arguing rarity, I just want an understanding of the terms.

The 1990. I've had it for over a year. I've carried it with me every day I go to work, 5 days a week, as a lucky penny and it's gotten a few bumps and dings along the way and still nothing but zinc shows. No crappy plating peeling off. No copper showing through scratches. No evidence of chemical alteration. With zinc being a porous metal by nature, wouldn't the porosity evidenced by my scans be indicative of its legitimacy? And if it is real, just how rare would that be and how much would it be worth?

Finally, who here is 1. trustworthy enough to send the dollar and the penny to be examined and 2. would actually be interested in doing so?

You are correct as to how the planchet is formed. But the field between the letters should be flat and if the die is slightly misaligned so that the letters were actually struck on the "proto rim" raised by the upsetting machine the flat fields would still flatten that rim and there would be not raised ridge running through the letters. But if the edge of the die is wearing, breaking down or sinking you will get that raised feature running through the letters.

An nonplated zinc cent when struck will show the same flat smooth lusterous surface that a copper clad one does. Platings can be rather durable. The copper plated cents have been in circulation for 30 years and I still have not seen one that has actually worn through the plating. You say no crappy plating peeling off, but if it isn't a"crappy" plating job it won't peel. As to value assuming it is real. If it was still a lusterous unc possibly $150 or better. but now after carrying it as a lucky penny five days a week for a year it has lost it's luster and the surfaces always make it questionable if you were to try and sell it. Maybe $5 to $10 if the buyer is convinced it is real.

I've seen a handful where the copper plating was worn in the last 2 years, but a handful when compared to the hundreds of thousands I've gone through in that time isn't much. And they've all been on the 2005 and later pennies.