Can you be more specific? I see plating issues on the first and die deterioration on the second...both of which are extremely common.
Yep see it-- the poster must see the '3' issue and the 'left overes' by the mint mark-yep looks like something, but I must agree with Non-cents. I liked how when you click on the pic I was able to zoom in big time..but hey keep searching--they are out there..
The "leftovers" is actually a d over d. I have had it looked at and verified. I do not know about the '53 though. Thanks for the input.
I agree with those that said the 85 cent had plating issues. this is why the cent appears to have a extra D mintmark is because of the corrosion swelling out between the copper plating and the zinc core. this is one reason I don't care very much for these zinc cents.
you sure got that right , these darn plated coins will be a nightmare for the beginning error collectors. I hate the way these zinc cents rots and swells the copper plating out in all kinds of different looking shapes. this even makes some cents almost appear to have doubled letters on some of them.
lets see if I get this one to load-I think this might an example of what we are talking about---sure looks an extra '6'--but aww gee.. its just a bubble--
I'll just be realistic and maybe blunt. The person who "verified" the 1985 D cent as anything but the effects of corrosion was clueless. If it was a dealer, he or she should be ashamed of themselves. There should be more knowledge behind a dealer's table than that. It's good old zinc rot under the plating. The 1953 shows the very common effects of having been struck by a very worn die.
