Post Mint Damage?

Discussion in 'Coin Chat' started by Nickidawn, Jun 27, 2023.

  1. Nickidawn

    Nickidawn Member

    upload_2023-6-27_11-31-29.jpeg upload_2023-6-27_11-32-8.jpeg upload_2023-6-27_11-32-37.jpeg upload_2023-6-27_11-33-1.jpeg upload_2023-6-27_11-31-29.jpeg upload_2023-6-27_11-32-8.jpeg upload_2023-6-27_11-32-37.jpeg upload_2023-6-27_11-33-1.jpeg upload_2023-6-27_11-31-29.jpeg upload_2023-6-27_11-32-8.jpeg upload_2023-6-27_11-32-37.jpeg upload_2023-6-27_11-33-1.jpeg I’m new here and I am hoping I can find a little bit of help. I have been going through my loose change for around eight years now. I have coins that I think might have some sort of error. I just have a lot of trouble deciphering between PMD and actual mint damage or spotting a definite double die(unless it’s an obvious one). Any help that anyone could provide with the following coins would be greatly appreciated.
     
    Kentucky, alurid and capthank like this.
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. charley

    charley Well-Known Member

    This is known as "shear" damage.

    It is sheer folly to assume other wise.

    (See what I did there? I am hugging myself for my cleverness).
     
    green18, capthank and Nann like this.
  4. Cheech9712

    Cheech9712 Every thing is a guess

    That 2007 cent looks different
     
    capthank likes this.
  5. Nickidawn

    Nickidawn Member

    You’re saying post mint damage? What I’m having trouble deciphering between is mint damage, and post mint damage not just “damage”.
     
  6. eddiespin

    eddiespin Fast Eddie

    Yes, it’s PMD. I think you’re getting good at this.
     
  7. Nann

    Nann Member

    2007 fell victim to a corrosive chemical?
     
    Cheech9712 likes this.
  8. Nickidawn

    Nickidawn Member

    I don’t know why the photos came up more than once, because I only attached them once. I’m obviously not good at message boards

    yeah, that 2007 looks very weird. Almost like it could have both kinds of damage one on top of the other.
     
  9. Nickidawn

    Nickidawn Member

    it feels very smooth to the touch, or just like any other penny, feels to the touch. Usually the ones that have been affected by chemicals feel rough, but I’m sure that isn’t necessarily true.
     
    Cheech9712 likes this.
  10. Nickidawn

    Nickidawn Member

    Ah, yea condescendence… definitely the way I would’ve went. I was simply clarifying.
     
    Cheech9712 likes this.
  11. Randy Abercrombie

    Randy Abercrombie Supporter! Supporter

    I been known to hide a cent in my woodworking projects to date the piece. I always coat them with lacquer once I hide them in the wood creation... And they often tend to look like yours.
     
  12. Nann

    Nann Member

    I "inserted/pasted" photos ...and then I realized that, at the bottom of my "in-progress, pre-post:" each photo [that I had just shared] was listed at the bottom as an attachment ... (so I deleted those.)

    NOBODY IS GOOD AT ANYTHING THEIR FIRST TIME!
    Give yourself a break!
    You are doing great!

    The very fact that you completed the action, and posted, is monumental. (Most people do not complete the action.) You are way ahead of the game. Be kind to yourself.
     
    Cheech9712 and Mountain Man like this.
  13. alurid

    alurid Well-Known Member

    The 2007 is quite strange looking to me. Not sure of cause but would say its PMD.

    The 1968-D has a die chip in the "D" (Filled D) which is a minor error, but other than that I don't see anything else. 1968 was the last year of use of the 1916 master die.
    68-69 (5).JPG

    The 1982 copper cent look like it was in a pinch and roll situation due to raised metal being all on one side of the deepest gouge on both sides. I think the mark was made with a pair of scissors possibly.
     
    Nann likes this.
  14. charley

    charley Well-Known Member

    I didn't consider that.
     
    alurid likes this.
  15. Kentucky

    Kentucky Well-Known Member

    You'll learn to mostly ignore @charley , don't hit him, he's old
     
  16. Neal

    Neal Well-Known Member

    The 1982 was cut, but more likely with metal shears than scissors. Ordinary scissors would not easily do that. I'm certainly not expert, but the 1968 seems to me to have something going on at the rim in front of Lincoln from about 1:00 o'clock to about 3:00 o'clock, possibly a little jiggle in the collar when struck, but it is far too minor to be worth any premium. The 2007 looks like it has something on it such as fingernail polish or varnish, as suggested above.
     
    Cheech9712 and Spark1951 like this.
  17. charley

    charley Well-Known Member

    I think that is probably what happened....wish I had thought of that.
     
  18. Spark1951

    Spark1951 Accomplishment, not Activity

    Scissors, no….but a small pair of diagonal side-cutters would do it easily.
    …imo…Spark
     
  19. alurid

    alurid Well-Known Member

    The marks on the OP's 1982 coin where defiantly not made with a small pair of wire cutters or diagonal side cutters. Note how the displaced metal is all on one side of the deepest gouge on each side on the coin. This fact shows that the coin made a rotational motion as it was being pinched. That can not happen with side-cutters due to the fact they are a pinching tool and not a shearing tool.
    If a macro photo was taken of inside of the gouge/groove in the ops coin, I am quite sure it would look like this. Note how the same micro grooves complete a full sweep from one side to the other with all the remove metal on one side.
    It is more a scooping/gouging action than a pinching bite of a face to face tool that has sides that do not go passed each other.
    20180315_194201.jpg
     
  20. charley

    charley Well-Known Member


    What the heck is wrong with you?

    Columbo wannabee or sumpin'?

    Gidoudahere!!!!.
     
    Nann likes this.
  21. alurid

    alurid Well-Known Member

    I'm hugging myself for my cleverness!!!...
     
    Nann and charley like this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page