1943 Steel cents - "Reprocessed" ???

The really pretty steel penny that Davada showed us in the "What's it worth" forum got me to looking at eBay (am I the only one that did that?) and see a number of pennies that a seller says have been "reprocessed". What does he mean? Have they been replated by somebody? Is that something to watch out for?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I did what I should have done first, I searched the internet.
"At the same time many more thousands of 1943 steel cents were stripped of their zinc plating and replated. These are known as "reprocessed coins," and since they, too, are alterations, they have little or no collector value."

Now the question is how to recognize these "reprocessed" coins? I would assume one would look for signs of pitting below the zinc plating and for diminished details. Are there any other tell-tale signs?

 

I for one don' believe you (or at least I can't} can tell if this has been done. The coin is electromagnetic stripped of the zinc and the new zinc is applied in exactly the same manner, only in reverse. Just like new. I have never been able to tell the difference.

 

These reprocessed coins can be recognised, in this manner, if the coin is not slabbed, and has an extremely brilliant spot free appearance then it is most likely reprocessed,, these coins did not stay shiney in fact they dulled quite quickly, and the zinc layer darkened or almost turned black on many of the coins,, environmentally they were very unstable much more so than copper.

Best way to buy these is in one of the leading TPG companies graded and slabbed at least there is a small amount of peace of mind in them being authentic this way .

Rick

 

That's what I was afraid of. It creates a kind of dilemma. It would seem that even the "reprocessed" ones would also start to show a patina quite rapidly if that was the case with the originals. I wonder how the TPGs can tell?

 

It's actually pretty simple to tell. If they look really bright and shiny, almost proof-like...they're reprocessed. If you ever see a slabbed MS67 or 68 they may look lustrous but never blindingly shiny. Hmmmm, I said never...well, I guess there could be an extremely rare case or two where they were the first coins off the dies and have a proof-like appearance but me-thinks that the luster would still be somewhat subdued.

 

Boy, what a shame it would be if mine turned out to be reprocessed. I think I'm in the clear, though -- under normal lighting conditions, the cent has a hazy gray appearance in the fields, and only the protected areas show hints of silver. The photographs I took were under rather harsh lighting (I was really quite surprised, looking at the photos, how well the coin lit up under a light source).

Still, who knows if that 'lamination defect' might have to do with a bad replating job.

 

If the coin is worn at all but bright and completely coated, then it is reprocessed. Circulated cents lost the zinc on the high spots fairly quickly.

 

I love this site!!

I would have never known that. I woulda probably bought a reprocessed coin and thought it was original. Thanks for the info. You guys probably saved me a bundle. i was wondering why people would be mass amounts of 1943 coins that look like they had been dragged through the dirt. HEHEHE I have some but mine are from hours of sifting through grandma's piggy bag, think it's safe to say they are original

 

I've misstakenly bought a few of those reprocesed cents. Is that done to fool the buyer in to thinking they are ms 65 and up. I personally like them better when they are toned.

 

"reprocessed" ???

Original uncirculated 1943 steel cents are really quite easy to differentiate from reprocessed.Since the electromagnetic reprocessing doesn't require the high pressure that a die does,there are no flow lines which cause the characteristic "butterfly" or cartwheeling effect that is seen on all early cents.Just move the coin side to side under good light and you'll see what I mean.Good luck.

 

I've gained some knowledge now from reading these threads about reprocessed pennies. Maybe I wont get stung again, LOL!!!
I more thing I was curious about with reprocessed steel pennies:
Does the edge of the coin give any indications of reprocessing?
I have a few where the edge is as shiny as the face and back.
Then in turn I have some with excessively shiny surfaces but the edge is dull.
Do you think someone would go through the extremes of reprocessing them and scraping the edges?
Probably anything is possible, someone please give me your input on this. ty

 

It appears we have two threads of similar nature. As to reprocessed 1943 Cents check out the post stating How to spot a reprocessed 1943 steel penny. As noted mostly they can be spotted but in many cases they can not be easily spotted. It all depends on the method of processing. Some of these were actually recoated with Zinc right over the rust of the steel and can be easily spoted. Many others were overly coated so they have enlarged letters and numbers. However, some were done as experiments and with a good grade coin and a light electroplating addition, the results are remarkably similar to a Mint issued coin.
Again, read the other post on this subject. The edge difference is probably caused by exposure to the paper wrapping in a roll where the edge touches but the surface is hidden by other coins.

 

Hey, thx for your reply Carl.
So just to sum it up would you say the original mint issue would have been issued with dull edges or shiny?
What I'm confused about I guess is rather they were coated from the mint after or before stamping.
I guess the best way to look at it is like someone else wrote, if it looks too smooth and shiny its probably a
re-coat.
I guess ya need a known absolute mint coin for comparison, and I'm getting to the point that I don't know if they really exsist, short of trying a certified coin.
Oh also has anyone noticed any weight difference from re-coats to originals?
I have not weighed any yet and I'm not sure my scale is accurate enough to tell the difference.
Thx again!!!

 

An accurate scale would only be usfull in itself if the coin was recoated with Zinc right over the existing material. If the coin had the Zinc coating removed and a very fine coating of Zinc reistablished, it would almost be impossible to find out by weight. Also an extreamely accurate scale would also note that any wear to the original coin would have to taken into account. As noted in this and the other thread of this subject there are some ways to tell if it has been tampered with. I never have been able to figure out why anyone would waste time playing around with monitarily minor situations except sort of like we did in Chem classes as a fun exeriment. However, there are people that do anything for a few cents profit.
As to these 1943 Lincoln Cents I started collecting them when I was a kid and they were just being issued by the Mint. I accumulated about 26 rolls of them from change so none would probably be a MS67, MS68, etc. The ones I have mostly have a shine from just being new. Zinc is not a great material that makes nore maitains a great luster. Mine are all in plastic tubes and sealed with clear tape. The edges are just as bright as the face and reverse. Some have larger lettering and numbers from the dies being worn and not resurfaced. There would be no need to have resurfaced a 1943 coin in 1943, 44 or een 45. By the late 40's many in change were already showing signs of rust. Remember stainless stell just wasn't around back then.
As to finding one in change lately it could happen. Remember that there are many people that have stashed coins away and then after 50 or 60 years turn them over to a bank. I saw an article in the paper some time ago when a guy had saved pennies for about 60 years and turned them all over to a bank for face value. The photo in the paper showed the bank guards using wheel barrels to bring in all of them.

 

I was trying to learn more about reprocessed 1943 cents and discovered this (very helpful) thread.

Please note that the link in the post by WaA140 (above), dated Jun 9, 2005, contains a link to a malware site.

I clicked on the link and immediately received an in-your-face blinking and blaring message telling me my computer was corrupted and instructing me to download some software to 'fix' it.

I could not close the web page normally (I had to use Task Manager). I immediately ran a full virus scan and a full malware scan, neither of which found anything, thank goodness. But if I had less computer experience and had downloaded the 'fix', uh oh.

The correct link is:

http://rrcoins.net/1943-cents/

and it is a very smart article.

The link above uses an underscore _ , instead of a hyphen - . Those tricky scoundrels...

Perhaps one of the moderators could remove or repair that link?

All the Best,

Mark

 

When I click on the original link, it redirects to the page in your link (with the dash instead of the hyphen). I see no indication of malware, but I'm running AdBlock Plus, in Safari, on a Mac.

Even the most innocent sites can fall victim to malware ads. If anybody else encounters this problem, it would be worth notifying the owner of rrcoins.net.

Welcome to CoinTalk!

 

removed the link, but since the original blanks were punched from zinc plated steel core, the edges of an original would show steel edges rather than zinc. Reprocessing plates all surfaces, including the edges. Jim

 

The link is still in the following post by OldDan. If you hover your mouse over it to see the link, it does have an underscore instead of a hyphen. Not sure why you ended up on the correct page. Maybe it's because Macs are better--that's what all three of my kids tell me!

Absolutely - I had a Wordpress blog that was destroyed by a knave who messed up the HTML so much it was beyond repair. I started over with a paid defense program that has been great for two years now. Learned my lesson!

Thank you!

 

Ah, excellent point. Thanks!