Lincoln cent 1973, but...

Discussion in 'Coin Chat' started by petronius, Dec 2, 2020.

  1. petronius

    petronius Duke

    Hi guys,

    I need again your help for a coin in the Italian forum lamoneta.it

    Is this 1973 penny

    lincoln73b.jpg

    lincoln73c.jpg

    lincoln73d.jpg

    Weight: 1.47 gr.
    Diameter: 18.65 mm.
    Thickness: 1.40 mm.
    Plain edge
    Metal: ???

    lincoln73a.jpg

    I think it's a fake, of course, but, why? For circulation? also in 1973 was worth... one penny. For collectors? it's a most common date, and its poor condition does'nt attract collectors.

    The owner has the coin since many years (approx. 40), but he does'nt remember where found it. Hopes for a pattern, as 1974 in aluminium, but...:rolleyes:

    Thanks for your opinions.

    petronius :)
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Amos 811

    Amos 811 DisMember

    It is an American cent. However the weight should be 3.1 grams. doesn't matter if its fake, not worth much anyways.
     
    SensibleSal66 likes this.
  4. DarkRage666

    DarkRage666 Ͳìɾҽժղҽʂʂ Ͳąҟҽղ ටѵҽɾ

    I'd keep it as a novelty
     
  5. SensibleSal66

    SensibleSal66 U.S Casual Collector / Error Collector

    I think they only proposed the notion of making an aluminum cent. There may be an example out there but it's worth over $500,000 . Ciao !
     
  6. cpm9ball

    cpm9ball CANNOT RE-MEMBER

    Since it appears to weigh less than half of the weight of a normal copper cent, it makes me wonder if the coin has been hollowed out. You might want to examine the inner edge of the obverse rim under high magnification to see if it there is a seam.
     
  7. desertgem

    desertgem Senior Errer Collecktor

    Photograph it held on top of a regular cent. If it is thinner and smaller in diameter, it has been soaked in acid solution. If you take your time with a weak acid , it slowly dissolves all 3 dimensions and thus the weight. Yours has the small pits and also notice that even the columns are thinner. Jim
     
  8. Beardigger

    Beardigger Well-Known Member

    I don't see a trace of lincoln in the memorial on the reverse either. FWIW.
     
    DarkRage666 likes this.
  9. petronius

    petronius Duke

    Spectrophotogrammetric examination by the owner says:
    75% aluminium, 25% copper.

    petronius
     
  10. Collecting Nut

    Collecting Nut Borderline Hoarder

    I'd have your scale rechecked.
     
  11. petronius

    petronius Duke

    Copper 15%

    petronius
     
  12. John Burgess

    John Burgess Well-Known Member

    Diameter is smaller than spec.
    Thickness is smaller than spec.
    Weight is much smaller than spec.

    Spectrophotogrammetry is way overkill and i'm doubful whatever result you are getting is only of the cent and not everything under and around it also.
    for a cent a simple spectrometer wouldn't be that accurate as it only does a few microns of the surface, but what you are claiming using seems like way overkill to me.

    I've got to declare shenanigans at this point overall. Sounds a lot like nonsense to me all the way around and some sort of a long con scam to me.

    Good luck with your coin and if it's someone trying to convince you it's something special with these pictures, it's a scam I think.
     
  13. petronius

    petronius Duke

    It's not a scam, only curiosity, the coin is not mine, but I have no doubts about honesty and bona fide of the owner.
    New photos.

    A normal 1973 penny

    lincoln73e.jpg

    The penny of this thread

    lincoln73f.jpg

    Both coins

    lincoln73g.jpg

    Finally, for those who might be interested, this is link to thread in Italian forum (translation Italian to English by Google)

    https://translate.google.com/transl...pic/194017-1-cent-usa-1973-lega-di-alluminio/

    petronius
     
  14. desertgem

    desertgem Senior Errer Collecktor

    Sure looks like a lesser diameter cent in the last photo. The article said it was 1.40 mm in thickness, when the common thickness of the cents then was 1.52mm. He also states it is 18.65 in diameter rather than 19.05mm. SO I am very sure if those numbers from him were correct, that it is an acid reduced cent, IMO, Jim
     
  15. eddiespin

    eddiespin Fast Eddie

    Paisan, grab yourself some sense. It's a worn out, beat up cent.
     
  16. John Burgess

    John Burgess Well-Known Member

    Thanks for the link and additional pictures. I'm now in the sandcasted fake category. Why someone would do it, I don't know their reasoning, maybe for practice then to move on to something more valuable?

    Could also be acid shrunk I'd suppose, but that's a lot of weight to lose for not a huge drop in thickness or diameter, without messing with the metal.
    so thinking a casted fake is more likely and maybe it's older done too. cents had a bit more value, especially in 3rd world countries in the 1970s, but also here. Maybe it spent time in Africa and circulated to italy after a couple years or something like that. No way of knowing, but if the composition is as claimed, them it's almost certainly a cast copy, made by someone melting aluminum cans and scrap copper, maybe even as a practice piece, trying to get it close and a reasonable color.

    What you are trying to attribute it to, a mint error dated 1973 and an early experimental test piece than when testing occurred, is the truly long shot explanation and would require proving with provenance, because IF this coin was struck, it's seen a heck of a lot of a corrosive environment/ seemingly pitting, to the point of making details mushy, which it would not be if struck and not messed with. They weren't experimenting with copper/aluminum mixes, they were experimenting with Aluminum trying to phase out copper completely if possible.

    "Detecting Cast Coins
    Generally cast coins have a slightly smaller diameter that official issues because molten metal will shrink somewhat as it cools. Also, because of the filing necessary to remove excess metal, many cast coins will be more oval (out of round) that struck example. On less circulated examples file marks can sometimes be seen on the edge or occasionally a "tab" can be seen that was not filed off.

    Very high quality cast coins will have a smooth surface but most examples are grainy or pitted, some may even have depressions caused by trapped gas bubbles. Also, the images and lettering on cast examples frequently lack clarity, often the letters appear to be filled in. These features were not considered to be detrimental however, for they gave cast counterfeits the appearance of older well worn coins. A common trick mentioned by several numismatists was for a counterfeiter to fry a pan full of newly cast coppers in some grease left over from cooking the supper meal and thereby blacken the coins to give them a circulated look.

    On many of the one hundred examples in the Smith and Mossman study the authors were able to detect telltale signs of where the coin had been attached to the channel, for both the in port and the out port (or vent). They mention on the English and Irish cast coppers there was a "distinct preference" for the ports to be 180° apart as in the serial cast but they found less consistency in port locations on the cast Confederation coppers. This would seem to indicate American made molds would not always have the git and gas vent entering (or exit) the coin cavity at 180° but might place them at an angle."



    As far as "scam". What I mean was, "off metal" isn't some new way of prying money from novice people pockets thinking they could be hitting the lotto.
    If it is some collector asking a question and not looking for a buyer, that's fine, But I am skeptical of this type of thing in general especially when it's a raw coin.
    All in all, if someone is selling it, Again, I'm gonna advise you or anyone else not to buy it. There's just no way it's getting attributed as genuine even if it is what you think it is, due to the pitting and no ability to trace provenance. Just as easily made in someones shed as the mint in it's current condition.
    I think it would be tagged as not genuine by a 3rd party grading company.
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2020
    petronius likes this.
  17. Oldhoopster

    Oldhoopster Member of the ANA since 1982

    I also feel it's a cast fake. It has the rough surface appearance of a casting and the letters/devices are mushy and indistinct. Also, castings can shrink a little on cooling, which would explain the slightly smaller diameter and thickness.

    Assuming the composition is correct at 75%Al 25%Cu I would suspect that the density would be lower than a standard Copper cent and that would account for the lower weight for something that is only slightly smaller. This is also why I think it's cast and not an acid etched coin.

    Why would somebody make a mold from a US cent and cast it in a different metal? I really have no idea. Maybe a school shop project.
    Regardless, it isn't a US mint pattern.
     
    John Burgess likes this.
  18. John Burgess

    John Burgess Well-Known Member

    yeah, that's my only real hangup at this point, the "why would it be done?" except as practice really is all that I can come up with to see if they could do it before moving on to something else, maybe a really poor country and someones attempt at getting over on a merchant also. it's hard to guess at the reasoning behind it being made by someone, whether for profit or practice, but the really long shot here would be it being a mint test piece with a date that none are known to exist at all.
     
  19. Pickin and Grinin

    Pickin and Grinin Well-Known Member

    It is not uncommon to find fake cents, Yes I said cents. It may take longer to make a dollar, but they are found in customs. Ballistic bags of moderns even.

    I think the OP's coin is a fake, and or what Jim stated about being shrunk in acid.
    Both are very plausible, what isn't plausible is being struck as is by the US mint.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page