Puzzling 1961 D Cent

This was my coin...so what is the determination then? I want to know how a enclosed cent becomes larger in size in both coin and bust?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

PMD, but we are assuming the smaller cent is the normal one. What if it is the altered one. I would like to see several cents including these 2 before speculating. I have seen coins made small by electromagnetism.
http://www.zmescience.com/science/physics/coins-shrunk-electromagnetic-blast-063654/

 

Is the rim higher than normal (Railroad Rim) and/or is the expansion slightly unequal on both obverse and reverse? If so it could be a Partial Collar strike. ANA grading book warns also not to confuse the expansion from partial collar strikes with the expansion of coins forced into "Lucky" holders. So, apparently "Lucky" holder expansion can be significant.

 

Upon further review I am going to go with "Centered Broadstrike".
Centered Broadstrike: - Coin expanded well beyond its normal diameter because the collar jammed far enough down on the anvil shaft to ensure that there was nothing to retain its shape during the strike. In this case, the planchet was centered between the obverse and reverse dies. ....-A "blank" has no rim yet. When the blank goes through the upsetting mill a rim is created and it becomes a "planchet". Planchets are then fed into the coining chamber and struck into coins.

 

Mike, this sounds plausible, but how could the coin expand without becoming thinner? It sure looks like both coins are the same thickness. Also, how could this be accomplished without any distortion whatsoever on the devices?

Chris

 

As far as I know the outside of the rim is not affected by a centered broadstrike and the rim is what you are looking at and comparing. If you look very closely at the second picture you will see the inside of the coin (best viewed on the right side of coin) just inside the rim looks much deeper than the coin on the right, therefore thinner.

 

I am now kind of back to a guess. This is the best matching example I could find. Many others do show some distortion in the devices closest to the rim.

 

According to Alan Herbert's book on Mint Errors, the centered broadstrike would show distortion of the design elements toward the rim.

Chris

 

The more I check it out the coin matches the ANA description of a CB better than it matches up to the actual pictures of a CB.

 

Or Non-pc named "Jewish" cent. It was placed between several layers of leather or similar material and mercilessly beat with a heavy hammer.

 

Much more common are "Texas" nickels.

 

As I look up Texas Cent the qualifications seem to be not only wider but thinner also. Not seeing the thinner part?

 

I wish I could do the same with mine. My girlfriend would not appreciate that, though. No idea why

 

but how would that make lincoln's bust proportionately larger? even broadstruck coins have the same sized devices as correctly struck coins because the dies themselves dont spread out.

 

gave both you guys a follow. I'm @phankins11 but dont post much...maybe I will with following more coin related accounts

 

I'm stumped, If it was smashed wider then it would be thinner.

 

cpm9ball seems close to the answer. Marvelous things can be done with photography. Has anyone seen this numismatic android?

 

Here...I will enlighten you with more photos of the coin since I didn't mess with them in the first place....give me a few. Seems like this penny has more questions then answers.

 

Two more images..can guarantee you guys no tricks have been played. Just trying to find out more about this cent.

 

On the second picture with the 2x2s. Both cents are in a NICKEL 2x2. The 61-d is huge compared to the next cent.