1986 d penny retained Lamination error

You are not confusing me . You make me fall Inlove this 1984 I don’t know why I so love penny

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

And in order to summon him, you call out @paddyman98 and he might hear

 

That means "laughing out loud" oldtimer...

 

ok . more picking on. Laugh out loud

 

Kind of looks more like a ruptured plating bubble (RPB)

 

You are quite welcome Marites, and Paddy , a lamination is a lamination. Yes I am sure there are realistic limits such as if the zinc was electroplated evenly and no contaminants got between the zinc and copper plate and the pressure on striking that could split the copper. I have a hard time thinking the "L" area and the lamination if it is , didn't act together. Jim

 

The missing L looks like a single letter missing due to being struck through grease or debris. A minor error and very common.

 

Going to try to write this a 3rd time but it's difficult because this subject vexes me so much and I'm going to attempt to keep the frustration and emotion out of it. Before I begin, I'm not an "expert", I don't claim to be either. I am an "hobby enthusiast".

Definition: Lamination errors are planchet errors in which the surface of a coin cracks and flakes. It is generally believed that lamination errors are caused by contaminants in the alloy that cause the metal to separate along the horizontal plane. Lamination errors can develop before or after the strike.

A copper plated zinc cent is not an alloy.

Plating bubbles, plating blisters, linear plating blisters, split plating, plating perforations or tears, and partial plating in my opinion are not lamination errors when it comes to copper plated zinc Lincoln cents.... or THEY ALL ARE LAMINATION ERRORS when it comes to copper plated zinc Lincoln cents and should be classified as such.

maybe I should get this guy slabbed as a lamination error?


This coin pictured above fits the definition of "lamination".... well no it doesn't, because it's not an alloy it's plated in 100% copper.
This topic vexes me because in the end it's not even a mint error in a lot of cases, it's a planchet manufacturing error, the plating went on wrong.

At least the one above happened in the minting process, with the strike, but "split plating" isn't something the TPGs slab...... so.... not a "lamination"......
For paddyman98 to have a "lamination error" zincoln, that would necessarily mean the copper plating solution was so contaminated with dissolved zinc that it was no longer copper plating but brass plating, and this brass alloy 'delaminated", which shouls ALSO be noted on that slab, that it's brass plated, so how about them apples? LOL!

Possible I need another attempt at this but this didn't rant nearly as much as my first 2 attempts.
Wrong planchet, transitional error, clipped planchet, struck fragment, missing clad layer, unplated planchet that was struck, all valid errors, heck, even "lamination" errors on alloy coins, hey, I'm in on that too whether it happens before or after the strike!

Finally, from error reference.com searching "lamination errors on clad coins"
http://www.error-ref.com/laminations-in-clad-coins/#:~:text=Definition: A lamination error occurs,of a coin or planchet.&text=Because copper-nickel clad layers,Yet such errors do occur.
"A lamination error occurs when metal flakes off the surface of a coin or planchet. It is generally believed that the flaking, peeling, and cracking is due to impurities in the alloy which causes metal to separate along horizontal planes of weakness.
Because copper-nickel clad layers are already very thin, it is quite unusual for lamination errors to develop within a clad layer. Yet such errors do occur. They can be distinguished from “partial clad” errors because the copper core is not exposed in a lamination error."

Again though the cladding is an alloy. (. 750 copper and . 250 nickel).

You know what you can't find on error reference.com? "lamination errors on plated coins".