10 cents is a dime except when they're silver

Just look at the #'s. It is a copper penny. Check your sources.
The page is in an app. "Mint error values" Offered by Daniel Malone in the play store Pic-n-Grin.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The nickel thought might be an option. It would have to be almost pure though.
If you know what that means...
It would not be the same # because the Dia. and thickness is that of what it is. A Lincoln cent on e-bay? 1976? Is it of true 70's era #'s?

 

The weight tells us it of a copper penny. Yet it is silver in color.

 

I know it is not of quality but the d is doubled died

 

Anybody?

 

You've just answered your own question. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's probably not a chicken.

 

With a few simple ingredients you can nab from any middle school chemistry lab...
https://www.sciencecompany.com/Turn-Copper-Pennies-Into-Silver-and-Gold-Pennies.aspx

Voila! Silver penny!

 

Read the start of my thread.

 

Weight would be wrong?

 

sure, if you're measuring to the nearest 0.001 gram or something.
1. It's physically impossible for a penny to be struck on an actual silver blank in 1976.
2. If it was struck on a dime or nickel planchet, it would look all messed up:
dime:

Nickel:

 

Granted, you may point to this as an authentic example:
http://coinauctionshelp.com/1976-Dstruckoncoppernickelplanchet.html#.WPxDaPnyvcc

But, there's literally one of those in existence. The chances of a twin popping up is slim-to-none.

 

But that one weighs 3.75gm. The OP coin weighs 3.11gm.

 

Not sure what more you are looking for. You seem to have your answer.

 

Hotwheels, can't the wrong planchet only be smaller and not larger?
(I.E. the penny minted on a nickel planchet) because the larger nickel planchet could never fit in the penny sized hub.

I had one of those (I thought it was a steelie) but it was a 1957 or 1958.
(Lost many years ago.) And I regretted it, until I read here that it was most likely mercury coating.

 

The weight for a pre-1982 cent would 3.11 g. The coating is so thin it doesn't add appreciable weight.

 

Look back to my answer on that . Small test!!! No plating. ON reverse. ( I said obverse in that post, sorry)

 

What "test"?

 

Also.
Dear Mr. Diamond:

“I’ve consulted with our technical experts regarding the cause of the appearance of the coins in the photographs attached with your e-mail.

The samples shown in the photos were the result of a loss of protective atmosphere or being stuck in the annealing furnace for a prolonged period of time, or both.

This would result in migration of the copper and nickel to the surface of the blank. Since there is three times as much copper then nickel in the outer layer of these coins, the diffusion of copper to the surface will be significantly greater than the diffusion of the nickel, resulting in the reddish appearance noted.

Depending on the time the blank sits in the annealer, and whether it is exposed to oxidizing conditions, various reactions can occur. This will result in the type of phenomenon shown in the photos, where a distinct layer of material forms on the blank surface (primarily copper, with a high degree of oxidation), which is quite brittle, and will break off in pieces. This will expose the original blank surface, which would also be oxidized, but closer in color to the original alloy. We have seen these types of blanks but only infrequently.

 

Could it be too much nickle?

 

Wonderful. The interwebs. What does it have to do with your coin?

http://www.error-ref.com/improper-annealing/