1957d LWC - strangely rectangular delamination

Looks like it was peeled off recently - shiny towards the bottom.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Nice find !! Any added Value to these ?

 

Uh, no idea personally. The value to me is in that I get to add it to my collection.

Most likely worth around twenty thousand on ebay, though.

 

Yea right @CygnusCC . I have examples also that have more of personal bond. Ebay!! LOL that's funny .

 

Its a detached lamination nice find.

 

Inquiring minds wanted to know. It does look like a recent detachment.

 

Nice detached lamination error. Looks like a fairly recent one like @alurid stated. Nice find.

 

If that delamination looks recent on a 1957 coin, then how can it be a lamination error made during minting? Wouldn't that simply make it post mint damage? j/a

Or do you mean that the lamination was partially detached and became fully detached recently? Oh.. yes... that could happen.

 

Hmm, good question. It seems to me even if it was pulled off yesterday, the lamination flaw existed when the planchet metal was first mixed. I guess that's the error, per se, rather than when it was removed...

 

I'm having a bit of a problem verbalizing this. Since lamination errors can develop either before or after a coin is struck, calling it a 'recent detached lamination error' on a 1957 coin would not be accurate...would it? I guess we're saying pretty much the same thing. @CygnusCC - (i know you did not use that terminology)

Please correct me on my terminology or wherever I am confused. Thanks in advance.

 

20,000 on etsy, maybe 20 on ebay

 

got an odd hankerin' to see the wonderful lamination error of @paddyman98.
By the way....most of the lamination errors i have seen (I'm no expert, obviously) have been rather rectangle like this one.

 

Laminations cone in detached and attached. Some times the lamination cracks but that’s all. They are small and large and everything in between.

You said it above but I hope this helps your understanding of them. If a lamination has four sides and three sides are loose, that means the fourth side is still attached. It’s made of metal so bend that fourth side enough and it will break off. In that case an attached lamination becomes a detached one.

That is what I believe happened on the OP’s coin. If you look at the lower part of the area on the coin it looks as if it recently broke off. It was attached for many years but it recently broke free.

@expat Can you please post your coin here to show what I just explained? Yours is not a US coin but the principle is the same. Thank you in advance.

 

Thanks @Collecting Nut Yes... i understand what you have described. I suppose my difficulty is trying to figure out whether the 'error' can be considered to continue to develop over time until it somehow becomes disconnected or whether the 'error' is complete at the time it is initially formed as an attached lamentation error (if that is how it begins when it doesn't completely come away from the coin initially).

I may just be making more of the terminology than necessary. Excuse me if that is the case.

 

I don't know enough to provide an accurate explanation myself, @LaCointessa . I'm still learning the in's and out's. I did see this on error-ref, though.

http://www.error-ref.com/lamination-loss-after-strike/

Apparently they classify it as a 'planchet error' and differentiate detached laminations between 'loss before strike' and 'loss after strike'

 

Ok

 

Good morning, Paddyman. That just NEVER gets old! :-D Thanks so much!

 

Thanks!

 

Sorry for not seeing this earlier, time zones between countries.
Here is a lamination that has a portion detached and the other is attached one end

And the attached

 

is a keeper, I suggest its legit