19-- cent question

This looks like some type of lamination error cent. Weight 3.1grams. Could it have stayed in circulation for 35 plus years looking as it does? Must be PMD. Any thoughts?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

@dollar

You may be right about it being a lamination error, but I'll have to admit that it is the strangest one I've ever seen.

First of all, it appears to be a copper cent......year unknown. It looks like the segment covering the "9" came from the area in the vicinity of 6 o'clock along the rim. It is also connected to the "foldover" segment which looks like a piece of pie. That's about as far as I can go.

Interesting!

Chris

 

A bolt of lighting hit it .
Of course, after it left the mint ..

 

road rage

 

another angle... sorry bout the blur

 

Who would have thuck .. I been looking all over for that coin .. jk

 

Thank god! At least it isn't a doubled die.

Chris

 

One strange thing. The E in E Pluribus does seem to be offset. Not sure if it matters.

 

Is the piece of metal affecting the date a thin sliver still attached to the coin like a piece of aluminum foil or is it a blob firmly affixed to the coin? If it's a little thin shard still affixed by one edge to the coin, I'll go with lamination. If it's a blob of medal on top of the coin, I'm going with PMD.

 

It is like a piece of aluminum foil that I can peel back. I was actually going to peel it back to see if I could determine the date. I decided not to. Maybe later tomorrow, I can get a better picture of it...

 

I'm 98% sure it's PMD. Wouldn't want to guess on the cause, but it certainly is interesting.

 

No! No! Don't peel it back. It might break off.

Chris

 

I think it is just circulation wear.

Chris

 

49 to 1? I'll take those odds and bet you 1c that it is a lamination error.

Chris

 

I won't peel it back and am hoping to get you a better picture of it later tomorrow. Thanks

 

I think it was or is a foldover plating or lamination issue and the fold over may have occurred after it left the mint, but with a bit of it still attached. No telling, IMO, from these pics how strong the piece is at the attachment point, could be frail.

 

The reverse reminds me of some of the 1982 coins put out at Philly. But if not that, perhaps one of the 1970s.

 

Maybe @paddyman98 will have another opinion, I know 0% about errors but from the looks of it I'll have to go with @cpm9ball on this one.


Thanks,
Jacob

 

Only one way to settle this. PCGS

 

It's an interesting Cent. But I'm not to sure about this one.