Check Out These Two Partial-Plated Cents...very strange

Discussion in 'Error Coins' started by JCro57, May 2, 2019.

  1. JCro57

    JCro57 Making Errors Great Again

    Notice the reverse of coin #1, and the obverse of coin #2.

    Observe how the plating did not bond to either in those areas leaving similar circular-shaped voids with almost the same circumference and area.

    Any thoughts on this?

    Coin #1
    0502191758b_HDR.jpg 0502191758a_HDR.jpg

    And coin #2
    0502191503_HDR.jpg
    0502191509_HDR.jpg
     
    Cheech9712, JPD3, R_rabbit and 3 others like this.
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Mountain Man

    Mountain Man Well-Known Member

    It looks like they sat in some solution that stripped them IMHO.
     
    VistaCruiser69, JCro57 and spirityoda like this.
  4. JCro57

    JCro57 Making Errors Great Again

    How would you localize the solution to do that? Plus, both the exposed zinc areas have original luster. That would be lost if chemically stripped.
     
  5. Collecting Nut

    Collecting Nut Borderline Hoarder

    I'v never seen anything quite like that before. Interesting and I would like to know how that occurred bug I have no ideas on what happened.
     
    JCro57 likes this.
  6. paddyman98

    paddyman98 I'm a professional expert in specializing! Supporter

    Reminds me of some article I read.. But I can't remember if it was Fred Weinberg or Mike Diamond who wrote it..
    They called it Bullseye Plating error.
     
    JCro57 likes this.
  7. R_rabbit

    R_rabbit Well-Known Member

    :)
    Imho,
    Looks interestingly like painters pennies. It looks like the 1985 was the bottom cent and the 1984 was ontop of the 1985 cent with paint in between. Then someone used paint thinner to clean it but
    failed:banghead:
    But what do I know I never seen something like this. It does have white green and a couple little red drops. It’s neat.
     

    Attached Files:

    JCro57 likes this.
  8. Fred Weinberg

    Fred Weinberg Well-Known Member

    I didn't write the article mentioned.

    Those are both genuine partial unplated
    zinc cents, imo.
     
    AdamL, R_rabbit, JCro57 and 1 other person like this.
  9. Oldhoopster

    Oldhoopster Member of the ANA since 1982

    Could this be due to planchets sticking together during the plating process?

    Just a speculative guess because I don't know the details of the high volume plating process used by the mint vendors
     
    JCro57 likes this.
  10. i2i

    i2i Active Member

    1984 & 1985(?)
    Found together?
     
  11. JCro57

    JCro57 Making Errors Great Again

    No. Found them 2 years apart
     
    R_rabbit likes this.
  12. JPD3

    JPD3 Well-Known Member

    I looked for Bullseye Plating and most of the articles I found were primarily discussing toning issues (artificial vs natural). Couldn't locate an error listed as Bullseye Plating. Maybe someone with a more in-depth search engine will prevail.
    I found an Unplated Zinc Cents article:
    https://conecaonline.org/unplated-lincolns/
    and another quoting @Fred Weinberg:
    https://markedmoney.tech/2019-cent-partial-plating-error/
    and a very old one from Mike Diamond:
    https://www.coinworld.com/news/prec...ot-an-the-error-collectors-clearinghouse.html
     
  13. Kevin Mader

    Kevin Mader Fellow Coin Enthusiast Supporter

    What likely caused this in my opinion are coins that are overlapping and stuck together. Clients of mine have to plate/outside coat things and routinely, something comes back with incomplete coverage. Especially if parts can stack together, you are more likely to get spots without coverage. Hydro lock, air pocket, or machine oil that eventually gets wiped off are the usual culprits.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page