I'm thinking that this is a genuine error with a post mint squeeze job...But I'm not 100% on that.... I'd like to see what others think about it. Matt
Its decent, I don't know why somebody would give it a squeeze job though And it is worth more than the average off center because it has a full date, but then less because it has Post Mint Damage. That's about all I know ~Cannyn
I don't think there is any PMD at all. In the center segment, you can see a reverse image of Lincoln and "TR" and part of the date backwards. It also looks like the upset rim of the center segment was flattened wider than normal since there was no collar to contain it. I can't explain it, but it looks like there is about a 60% clip that was struck on top of a normal planchet. How, I don't know, but it is a 1972-D. Chris
Chris, In the first picture you can see where the "heavy rim" impression from the indention goes into the slope down into the struck area. To me this means that the incuse markings came after the off center strike. I just can't wrap my head around how it could be mint made. I know there are some true error experts here and I hope this thread might get their attention.
I agree with you, Matt. This looks like an "enhanced error". Someone took an ordinary off-center strike and pressed the obverse design of another cent into the unstruck area of the obverse face while the unstruck area of the reverse face rested on some hard surface. Since the off-center strike is thinner than the rest of the coin, it would have been protected from damage.
Mike, How could the upset rim be flattened like that? It is obviously wider than a normal rim...nearly two-fold. Chris
If it was a squeeze job how would this have survived? It looks like the offcenter strike was the second strike..
To me it looks like the impression of the design rim has invaded the slide zone. That's not unexpected since the design rim is higher than anything else. Still, a close examination under a microscope should be undertaken of this and other areas to see if the internal margin of the slide zone is disturbed. That would be the expectation if this is an enhanced error. It does seem that the internal margin of the slide zone is disturbed by Lincoln's face, but it's subtle. One thing you should note is that there is a little bit of a collar scar toward the bottom of the reverse image but no trace at the top of the reverse image. That would be consistent with post-strike obliteration.
I'm not sure what you're referring to. The proto-rim should be flattened where the other cent overlaps it. This would be true regardless of whether the incuse impression is pre-strike or post-strike. The level of proof demanded of such an error should be exceptionally high. While such an error is possible, it's quite unlikely. You've got a flipover mirror "brockage" on the obverse face and a rough surface on the reverse face that is not from contact with another planchet. So you've got three elements stacked on top of each other and none of the expected increase in striking pressure. In fact, the strike is quite weak, judging from the lack of expansion and incomplete nature of the "brockage". The whole thing smells.
