1941-P Lincoln Cent struck on foreign planchet?

I picked this up in a local auction lot of mixed coins/tokens. It stood out right away because:

It is very thin, it has a ring somewhat like that of a silver coin, and the details appear muted, as though weakly-struck.

I ruled out tampering, because a Lincoln cent shaved down that thin would be blank on both sides. I don't collect error coins and this is only the second I've come across in auction lots I buy (I mostly resell but do collect tokens and medals I like) - have a question about the other coin in a separate thread. Thusly I do not have the proper tools for determining accurate weight or measurements and I have to guess.

As for weight, it is noticeably lighter than the 3.11 grams of a normal Lincoln (I am aware the US Mint has a weight tolerance of plus or minus .1 or so). I also do not have a way of taking some of the very detailed photos many users here do. I did the best I could in showing the thickness compared to a 1933 cent, and the diameter, between a 1932 and 1933.

I suspect it was struck on a foreign planchet, and I am asking for opinions on what it could be. I found several examples of 1941 Lincolns struck on .640 25 cent planchets for Suriname (a Dutch colony at the time), but not any struck on 10 cent .640 blanks. The 25 cent I have seen appear to have close to full rims - the size difference between it and the bronze Lincoln blank is not that great. This coin has very little in the way of a raised rim, and it seems to me that a smaller 10 cent blank would explain a couple things:

The smaller blank would compress without reaching the collar die, resulting in a coin thinner than the specifications for the 10 cent blank, and a greater diameter than the 10 cent blank. Both of these seem to be the case here. It also looks like there's some lamination on the front. I also notice there is a red/tan tone that is not present on most silver coins but might be explained by the 36% copper content.

I'm asking for knowledge/opinions on what country/denomination planchet this might be. Thanks in advance!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Welcome to CT Curtis.
The coin has been in acid.

 

Thanks for your opinion. It's very possible the coin found its way into some acid. It does not seem to me, however, to be possible if the coin had been dipped, for that much metal to be eaten away, for the coin to be that thin, and still have ANY detail remaining, let alone the amount it has. And it would not change the composition of a bronze coin to where it has a silver-like ring to it.

 

That Cent was definitely dipped in acid.
It can still have details after corrosion.
No matter what you think it's been altered.
Sound test means nothing.

Not struck on foreign planchet.

Welcome to CoinTalk

 

Ummm.... Well... Welcome to CoinTalk!

 

The coin you’re asking about was definitely damaged by acid.
Welcome to CT.

 

A coin eaten away by acid; it takes metal from the surfaces evenly. It does not eat the high points off the coin first.

 

I understand what you are saying, but it also does not eat away at the center of the coin. This coin is maybe 50% the thickness of a normal coin. I just do not believe a coin eroded to that extent would have ANY detail remaining.

 

Welcome to CT @curtisports.
It sound like you don't have a scale or calipers, but do you have a local coin shop you could take it to for them to analyze it?
As stated by most of the others, it was most likely just in some mild acid solution that ate away at the soft copper. The details, having been compressed by the dies, are very hard, so wouldn't show more wear than the rest of the metal.
When acid is mentioned, many people thing of a liquid that will eat through their skin, but just leaving a coin in lemon juice, which is acidic, can produce some odd anomalies.
Good luck.

 

Who said it ate away the center of the coin?
Not me. Evenly means that it with leave all the details, just not as defined.

 

It also could have been dipped in Ferric chloride or similar reactant used in making printed circuit board. The process was invented in 1936 in England. The substance being reduced will have a small amount of variation of the bronze cent thickness since the surface is not flat and level, so it will not be a perfect image as original.In the WWII times, the melting/mixing of the metals might have had areas that had more of one component than the other. I have had quite a bit of copper etching building my first computer in early 1970 and electronic accessories for my Amateur Radio license. The answers above are extremely likely to be correct IMO,

Jim

 

Send the Cent to NGC or PCGS.. When they attribute it as struck on foreign planchet then get back to us and prove us wrong.. Good luck

And while your at it you should send you Canadian Cent also..

Seems like you don't want to accept any of the correct answers we have given you.

 

If it was struck on a foreign planchet at that size, then it also must have been struck with miniature dies. That makes it an extra rare error.

 

That is so true.

 

That is exactly how acid affects coins, the high points and low points are eroded equally and they retain the details. Do a search on this forum and you will see dozens of them!

 

Welcome to CT. These guys speak truth, whether you like it or not. No disrespect intended, just truth.

 

And you've been collecting coins how long, @curtisports?

 

Curtis welcome to CT. Listen to these guys. Collectors that have seen many many many coins.

 

Welcome to CT!

Your coin has been dipped in acid. What you are seeing is the disrupted material layers deep in the coin. If you recall, acid is used to reclaim dates on a dateless Buffalo nickel.

The longer a cent soaks in the acid, the less detail remains. I’ve taken cents down to razor thin…yet an image of Abe remained.

 

Acid damage. 100%

Accept it or continue to cling to bad information and keep making the same mistakes and wasting money.

If you know so much, then why come on here and ask experts for their opinions?