I just started searching rolls a few weeks back for the first time. One thing that really stands out to me is the difference of the strike of the pennies from the 1960s to the ones now. They are so much deeper, with more relief (is that the proper way to say it), and so much more attractive to the eye, IMHO. I hope this isn't a stupid question, but other than the copper vs. zinc content, was there a change made so that today's cents don't have such deepness in their strikes? thanks for your comments....I'm still a neophyte in a lot of this stuff. Bob
Yes -- I've noticed that, too, and have been meaning to ask somebody about it. If you look at your cents -- there must have been a huge change between 1968 and 1969. The 69's look ugly, imho -- way to shallow -- compared to the earlier 1960's that have big relief. But I'd like to hear from some cent experts about this!
Actually, I've been of the opposite opinion, that the 1969 changes made the cent look better. By 1968 cents had gotten to the point that the legends were right to the rim of the coin.
1968 was the last year for the worn out 1916 master hub. Personally, I think the 60's cents are pretty ugly, the border was almost completely gone, the lettering merged with the rim and the devices were no longer sharp.
Wow, BadThad, that is so interesting, because I just LOVE the look of the 60s pennys. I'm keeping a lot of them just because I like them. It is facinating to me how different people's tastes are....
I absolutely notice it. I've been roll-searching for a couple of months, and had been thinking of starting this very thread! Joe
But don't you agree that the Lincoln portrait is shallower relief starting in 1969? _That's_ the aspect of the coin I find ugly.
