1943 cents - were there different types?

He is saying it looks like all your cents in this thread have been reprocessed which can affect the details of the date and stuff.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

the second one in the first post looks like the 3 is more open

 

So 'reprocessed' means PMD? I don't see that. I see a coin with out a MM that has the 3 normally found on a die commonly used to stamp S coins. Seems simple enough that it is a 3 from a die at a mint - rather than some bizarre scenario that would later change some other type of three to exactly the S mint 3. I have to believe this a die variety, and a rare one at that. Have any of you checked your 43's to see how rare this is? I bet someone else has at least one.

 

If you are sure it is a variety, send it to an attributor. You will get credit for your amazing find. But as Jody said, the master dies were all made in Philadelphia. There wouldn't be a difference in design of the date for the different mints. I'm seeing reprocessed cents with some circulation wear and damage.

 

My friend, you might need some Kynamro. Did you not see all those S coins linked to up ^ ??? They have this 3. Far as I can see the other mints have that other 3, for the many many coins looked at. Did you miss that part? This is why I'd like some help from the gang seeing what they have. So far 2 likely scenarios exist, either the P mint who didn't place a mark also used this 3 or the S mint forgot to MM some coins. That is how it is unless/until we get some examples helping us lean one way or the another. It seems obvious there is some die variation since the 2 types plainly exist in the population, this particular coin has a rare cross of 2 factors, no MM and the SW pointing tail. Please define 'reprocessed '. Thanks.

 

Reprocessed is people outside the mint giving them an extra layer of plating to shine them up. Plating coins can alter the appearance of the design. I don't even see where you linked the San Francisco Mint cents...as said before, Philly makes all the master dies for the other mints. That is a fact. Therefore, there will be no variation in the design of the date due to design variations.
You forgot the 3rd likely scenario...cents that appear a certain way due to alteration outside of the mint, such as reprocessing and circulation wear.

 

These are not plated (after the mint anyway). In fact they are under weight if you read above. These have been in my family for over 60 years. On the non silverish 2 the zinc is gone and the base iron has oxidized to things like hematite and magnetite. That 3 is where the mint put it. Have you now looked at the various examples of S coins with the SW 3 tail? Do you actually deny that variance (nothing to do with this coin per se) ?

 

Show us the images that back up what you are saying.

 

Considering the popularity of the 1943 steel cent, if there were a major date variety, don't you think it would have already been noted? I don't think 1974 cents are nearly as popular as 1943's and the difference in the '74 LD & SD is very subtle. That being said, do you really think everyone is going to dig out their 1943's to look for a non existing variety so you can figure out which way to lean? After reading all of these posts, it looks like every other person is "leaning" one way. I only see one person that still believes a SW pointing 3 variety is possible. I still can't figure out why people ask for help and when they get help, from credible sources, refuse to believe the sources because the answer is not what they thought it was to begin with. If you know it is a new ultra rare variety, send it off and shove it in everyone's faces.

 

When you talk about weight, you have to consider the tolerances that the mint allowed. For the 2 deliveries of 1943 planchets ( A . 2.67 grams, B. 2.75grams

Min 2.54 grams nominal A 2.67 grams ( +/- 0.13 grams) max. 2.80 grams

min 2.62 grams nominal B 2.75 grams ( +/- 0.13 grams) max. 2.88 grams

so the range for 1943 cents where they are within tolerances and thus can't be separated is from 2.54 grams to 2.88 grams.

So all of yours are within the tolerances and thus you can not claim a difference due to weight.
( numbers from Breen's encyclo.)

 

Both from PCGS Coin Facts and neither has the "3" that you've displayed.

Of course this means nothing.

 

One thing I've learned on CT over the past few years... no matter how accurate your analysis of a coin that's posted in these threads, the OP will refuse to accept the truth about their coin. They believe only what they want to believe. Here we have a few beat up '43 cents with normal wear and tear (nothing unusual). However, if one wants to argue that they have a die variation (or whatever), that's OK too. It makes for enjoyable (and educational) reading.

 

I agree. It's fun and a challenge to keep up with all the possibilities that can actually come from the mint.

Part of the fun is lost when all the op cares to do is argue.
The fun comes back when the op can show and prove the point with images and facts.

 

Not sure what you are looking for. Do you not see the scans of my coins in this thread? Do the links I posted previously in this thread to other S coins found on the net not work?

 

Just to be certain, is it your position that the 3 on those S coins I pointed out is not sw pointing?

 

What was my claim? 1)They weigh what I reported. 2) They are not 'reprocessed' to add plating - which might show up as increased weights, the lowish weights are facts that argue against the plating proffer, and BTW were offer far in advance of that having been proffered. What does everybody think they have been plated with?

 

I agree that those examples have the W pointing 3 tail. Do you not agree that there exists another variety of 3 with the SW pointing tail?

 

boy my eyes are doing tricks on me. the first two kinda look like copper, but I know that you have put a magnet to them. plus I have seen a lot with rust that will look like that too. but not all over.

 

They are all very magnetic, as expected. That nice coloration seems to be a curse.

 

I am going to make the point about the S coins having this variation, only because it seems that is being disputed. I do not enjoy having to do this, but if the argument against this coin being a rare bird with the variation on either a Philly coin or an S coin mistakenly not mint marked is going to be based in the variation not existing in the S family, I must right that. Stop me when you capitulate From post #11 is : http://cdn103.iofferphoto.com/img/item/576/097/86/riNVH6NR0Fb5dLc.jpg and here is my mark up showing the tail orientation: