Lincoln Cent on Dime Planchet and on Dime Blank

I enjoy collecting errors, and even better if I can find the same error stamped on both a Planchet (with a rim) and stamped on a Blank (no rim). Just got the blank today!

Presented are: MS65 PCGS 1966-P Cent on 10c Planchet, and; MS66 ANACS 1980 Cent on 10c Blank.

For some reason, the detail of Lincoln Cents stamped on Blanks even in high MS grades almost always have a noticeably weaker strike, particularly in the first few letters of the word "STATES" and the first few letters of "E PLURIBUS UNUM" on the reverse. And seldom are there a lot of separated steps on blanks of the Memorial. Yet obverse strikes are usually sharp...no idea why this occurs with such great regularity vs. sharper details for this error type struck on planchets.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

You always have some cool stuff to share. Thanks!

 

Nice examples. Weird that they still look copper.

 

While no error expert, I would suppose that the differing strike characteristics are largely due to the upset rim on a planchet.

During strike, the metal flows from the edge to the center. The upset rim gives something to push against (for lack of a better description) and therefore would result in a better strike.

 

I know nothing...BUT my guess is that since the cent is larger than the dime, when it was struck, the black was spread out more making it thinner and possibly exposing the copper core. Just my guess.

 

I see no difference in the ANACS or PCGS coin.. They both look like Planchets..
I think ANACS just left out the word Planchet..Looking at other Blank Planchets they attributed they don't use the word Planchet which would make you think it's just a Blank.
IMHO

 

Most off-metal and wrong planchet errors are struck on blanks. That's because the undersized blank betrays no sign of passage through the upset mill. The grading services pay little attention to whether the coin is struck on a blank or a planchet and therefore label most of them as having been struck on planchets. Most of the time a strike on a blank is indistinguishable from a strike on a planchet. You really have to study the edge to see if it has a blank's "cut-and-tear" texture or a planchet's smoothed-out surface texture.

 

@paddyman98
That's exactly what I thought at first. So, I made as a condition of this sale, that if the label is incorrect and it turns out it is in fact a planchet that I am 100% refunded including all shipping.

Let me just say that these ANACS holders are annoying because the two sides of the plastic inside the showcase circle are touching, thus it looks like there is always moisture in there; it's also hard to see rims and edges.

Anyway, I checked the edges and it is dead on for the rough, punched-out, unsmoothed appearance that blanks have. Also, the photos are taken on a slight angle and the edge of the hole adds to what one might think is a rim. What you think you see is raised is actually sloping down. These closeups should help.

The bottom under Lincoln almost appears to prove it is not a blank, but it is only raised above the bottom of Abe because the pressure to stamp him was not all the way to the edge, so it is natural that the edge Underneath Him would be higher, giving the false appearance that it is a planchet. The weak strike on the reverse in those areas mentioned above is also kosher with those struck on blanks.

 

Plus holding the two in hand, you can see where the luster stops with the 1966; the 1980 one doesn't do that and goes right to the edge.

 

@JCro57 hey you got a post by Mike Diamond cool

 

Please forgive me. I don't know who he is yet. But I can see it is a good thing!

 

only thing you need to know about Mike = expert

 

@JCro57 DUDE - https://www.coinworld.com/news/us-c...--error-coin-specialist-mike-diamond.all.html

and

https://www.coinworld.com/authors/mike-diamond.html

and

 

I read his work all the time and just didn't make the association.

 

Here are two struck on blanks offered by Jon Sullivan. Notice they also have the same characteristics as mine struck on a blank, including the same weakly struck (or missing) areas on the reverse.

https://sullivannumismatics.com/products?search_api_views_fulltext=Cent+dime+blank

 

Well, I went back and looked at my 2 nickels stamped on copper cent planchets after reading Mike Diamond's comment. One says blank and one says planchet...but they both have rims. The one listing it as a blank is WRONG. Thankfully I only bought it because it was cool to have 2 consecutive dates.

Is it really too much to ask to have someone working at TPGs who ensures what is in the holder is on the label?

https://www.cointalk.com/threads/post-an-off-metal-or-wrong-planchet-error.314004/#post-3042273

 

Correct.. A Blank Planchet

 

Look st the slabs. The correctly labeled slab comes from PCGS, the incorrect slab from the “new” ANACS.

This is just one example of exactly why PCGS slabs command a better price than ANACS, and why people don’t have the confidence in ANACS that the market demands.

 

Well the one my nickel was mislabeled in was an NGC slab

 

Fair enough. Mislabeled in what way? Using blank vs planchet?