1943D Steelie Crazy RPM can’t find attributed anywhere! OPINIONS?

Maybe I should dust off my Stamp collection for a while although there is pareidolia there sometimes too.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I kinda see what your talking about, but I highly doubt it's an error at all. My guess is die break or more DDD. But if you like RPM's, look at anything before 1970, and you'll find many. Most common in the early 1960s and 1959.

 

Honestly, getting back to your original question, that's not a repunched mark. All of these 1943 cents are plated. What you photographed in that mark is simply how those plated planchets often times to take the strike from the dies. And your coin doesn't appear to be "re-plated." There's the issue, there, technically. It's whether the plated cents have been re-plated outside the mint, typically in an effort to restore them. I don't think this cent was, FWIW.

Or, let me revise that. It may have been dipped. That's technically a little different than a re-plate.

 

I usually try to do my research on a coin before I post, and try not to be so positive that I start arguing I am right and rest of you are wrong, but that's just me.

 

Those are not natural surfaces on
either side of that '43 Steel Cent.

 

I think a lot of it has to do with "they think it's worth a lot of money, but they just don't know precisely how much". Before creating a thread, they've already made up their mind to this notion that it's worth a lot. So they don't take kindly to being deflated when being told it's not worth anything except face value.

 

Some people just can't accept the truth.

 

I wouldn't make excuses for it just because it's you. I actually think it's a good attitude for everyone. But that's just me.

 

Really man? We obviously weren’t discussing and referring to the original mintage process of the coin. So the facetiousness really was uncalled for, my friend. The coins are ALL plated, so therefore this one IS plated. Danget, when you’re right, you’re right. Lol does that feel better?

Now, BACK TO the discussion of the coins current, almost 80 years after original mintage, state of being and if you truly couldn’t tell and weren’t aware previously, that I was referring to the coin not being plated POST MINT, well that’s what I meant and I can assure you that it hasn’t been plated by a third parry, post mint. Please don’t make me go further into all this. Just take my word for it. So, that being said, do we still be leave, after looking at the secondary set of photos that I posted, especially, that a deteriorated due would cause the sharp, high and pronounced, very well defined and in the just about perfect shape of a “D”, that is clearly seen on this coins mint mark and the immediate surrounding area? Because I have never seen that to be the case. DDD is normally the typical and exactly what you would expect, based upon the nature of the anomaly, makes things wider and softer and “mushier” most people say, causing everything to have LESS sharp details and pronounced beginnings and ends snd just gives everything that overall fluffy And melted look to it. Again, there is some of that in the background of all the stuff I am referring to, where it’s that classic like big shadow in the basic shape of the device. But what we have here is on top of all that and are actual sharp lines that make the approximate shape of a capital D. Sometimes I think I even see multiple “D”s and in different orientations. You can see the lines and marks inside the primary D in some of the photos. And you can pretty clearly make out an almost complete, without breaks D in some of the photos. Am I the only one seeing this stuff?

and if people are telling me that DDD can and does create such sharp, pronounced, high off the field, perfectly shaped markings, then that’s different and I will have learned something. But I have just never seen that and from what I know and have seen, that’s actually the exact opposite of what DDD anomalies look like and create on a coin. Let me know! And, just because I realize it needs to be said, there are zero hard feelings here and I refuse to allow something as trivial as a penny and it’s markings to cause me to disrespect another human being or be disrespected by another human being. That would just be wrong on so many levels! A PENNY, yall! Worth trouble? Heckkkk nooo! Lol so, peace and love and all the above, to everyone! That’s where I’m at! Hope all is well with everyone.

 

No disrespect meant, I really enjoy the 1943 steelies, and, although I don't have any graded uncirculated ones, I do have some VF and XF ones. Looking at your full-coin photos, the surface just looks grainy and not at all original. Here are some full-size photos.

 

It's dipped in something.

 

Hey OP, how's the view up there?

Edited

 

Let's explain it so you'll get what everyone is talking about. Yes they were all plated. Later in coin history they were reprocessed by companies and sold as bright shiny steel cents. This "reprocessing plated the entire coin, including the edge which showed no signs of plating on the original coins. THAT'S the plating they're referring to, the reprocessing, not the original. A photo of the edge will show if it was reprocessed or not.

 

Well thank you. And we love you, too, I'm sure. But that cent is still compromised as they come.

 

Got to wondering about "reprocessed" cents and spent a few minutes Googling without any definitive answers. What I found said the original zinc is stripped and the bare iron then replated. I was wondering if the replating is done electrically or if it is just dipped in molten zinc, kind of like hot galvanizing.

 

I believe they're electroplated.

 

Yes, like @enamel7 said, I think most certainly are electroplated. They're those real shiny, glassy ones. There are all kinds, depending on the solution. Then there are dipped ones. Those hardly get the mention much, or, at least I've found, however they're not unlike the idea behind silver dipping. These 1943 cents are "fence post cents," as I call them, just to help me visualize the metal we're dealing with in them. I see a rusty fence post, I see a rusty 1943, that makes sense. I see a dipped fence post, that's not natural, that doesn't make sense. I see an electroplated, shiny, glassy fence post, neither is that natural. If a 1943 cent doesn't look like a fence post, something was done to it. Does that make sense? Cowpuncher?

 

Not exactly, perhaps in moist climates but not rust in desert storage. If you say rust or a dull steel color rim , I would agree. It is obvious the difference between steel and zinc plate Jim

 

"Rust" was just an example. The whole point went sailing right by you if you didn't understand these steel cents can't look like what a steel fence post can't look like. Put them in the desert or at the bottom of the ocean, it's a visual helping to nail what's and what's not normal in these cents, that's all.