1943 cents - were there different types?

Someone brought up the fact that heat is used in the proscess. Any Metal heated and cooled repeatedly can slightly change over time... Even if it is harder it does go through slight expansion and contraction cycles. If the hub is made of a slightly inferior mix than normal I could see the narrowing of the features over time.

This would only be true if it could be shown that more than one die exhibits the exact same narrowing though.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I think anyone could sell their own variety on eBay.

 

Or at least try I am just trying to get a consensus that there are 2 types of 3's used on the steelies. I can't understand why there is so much resistance to that and denial of the obvious existence of the SW tail 3's.

 

Apparently 5 pages of us saying "no" and explaining why was not enough of a consensus for you.
And again, since you seem so adamant that it is a new variety, send it in to an attributor and get credit for the first one of this amazing, unique find.

 

I don't think it is new. Nor does it seem unique after all the other photographic evidence is in. Look at the image I took off ebay, do those tails all look W pointing to you?

 

Even this one from your stomping grounds seems to be SW tailed. http://www.lincolncentresource.com/sitebuilder/images/1943_copper-433x400.jpg

 

I've not checked this forum in a couple of days. I haven't missed anything. We are still discussing this 3. I think I am going to spend every 1943 cent I have because this thread has made me hate the steel cent. It is my least favorite of all Lincolns. Spend them or scratch off every 3 so I don't ever have to think about a SW pointing 3 again.

 

It doesn't matter what it "looks like", you don't seem to grasp the concept that there cannot be 2 different style 3s. Read posts 19, 24, 26, 29, 31, 42, 52, 59, 62, and 74. Please read the evidence written in those posts, and then come up with an explanation for your "different styles of 3's" OTHER THAN "they just look different".
Honestly I don't know why I am replying. It seems you just want to keep this dying thread going by bumping it or commenting about it in different threads.
Since you seem to be the only one noting it, why not write to an attributor about it, or link them to this thread?
I think I'll stop replying now. If none of the 5 pages of responses convinced you, why should mine?

 

I agree that any coin falling in the range you cite is within tolerance, the separated qualifier throws me. Between 2.62 and 2.80 (assuming original condition full weight in spec coins) the deliveries are indistinguishable, but below 2.62 they should be from A and above 2.80 they should be from B, right?

 

Yes, I was mistaken I should have put the limits as you list them.

That is correct for a 1943 MS coin with no reacted zinc surface layer measured with a analytic quality balance. Whether it would be labeled as Type A or Type B or other than just 1943, would depend on the TPG that might grade such.
Jim

 

From another thread ^

One point seems to be escaping you. This is not just 'a die' since it happens on some coins from all mint marks.