1978 ? Nickel Struck On 1 Cent Planchet

I agree! However, what was not told or shown is what year was the reference penny? The only year that would properly work would be a 1978 Lincoln Cent. Any other cent leaves more room for questions.

Ribbit

Ps: For all the Doubting Thomas's, take a Lincoln Cent and Jefferson Nickel and compare thickness to one another then look again at the edge photos. How can the Jefferson Nickel possibly be THINNER than a Lincoln cent without the obverse/reverse also being whittled down considerably? I see do damage to either surface and the only possible reason I can see is it was struck on a copper planchet and because it overlapped the planchet the die "squished" the planchet and the result was a Jefferson Penny thinner than a regular Lincoln Cent, but I still await certification to know for sure.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I personally own a 1980 Nickel struck on a 1¢ planchet and OP's pics really don't look any different than mine with respect to color and details. His even have the same silvery look.

My suggestion would be to send it to ANACS first. It would only cost $10 plus shipping and you have a greater chance of not getting it back in a bodybag.

If ANACS does grade it as authentic, then you still have the option of sending it off to your preferred service. If ANACS says it's an altered nickel, I would trust their judgement on that.

As for value, I paid about $100 for mine many years ago. I believe last time I looked, they were going for $200 plus.

 

Hey Jaxsdad? Can you take a good edge photo of the damaged area (2 gouges) and post it?

Ribbit

 

Not that I doubt your expertise:

But.. if a smaller planchet (from the cent) were struck by a larger die (the 5 cent) then the coin would be thinner (as shown (that is a good part).
However, the new cent/nickel should be larger than a normal cent. Since the collar is not there to restrain the size (expansion) of the strike.
In your last photo, side by side, they appear to be the same size. Is this correct?

 

One more question to pose, since Treashunt made me think of it, what's the likelihood of the penny planchet centering so perfectly in a nickel die? I would think the odds of that wouldn't be good, although possible.

Ribbit

 

Toad:
Actually, as far as centering in the die, as good as any other position.
Statistically speaking.
However, that could be why it (may have) circulated as long as it did.

 

The problem is how many other positions are there? 100? 1,000? 10,000? This "example" is practically dead center so once you take into consideration the odds of a penny planchet making its way into a batch of nickel planchets (ie. - 1 in 1 million), to then manage an almost dead center strike (ie. - 1 in 1000), the odds aren't good for this to occur, but not impossible (if the "ie's" were the actual odds, then the odds of this example occurring would be 1 in 1 billion).

I don't have the knowledge necessary to take a stab at the odds for this to occur and I don't know anyone who does. That's why I asked the question.

Ribbit

 

On mine, the coin is about the same size as a cent. It did not appear to spread out as much as you would expect for a broad strike, but it could be due to the thinner planchet. It probably won't be today, but when I get a chance, I'll scan an upload an image of mine.

 

How centered is it?

Ribbit

 

It's in the safe. I'll get it out this weekend and scan it.

 

I'm going to weigh in here and say it is real. One thing that convinces me is something some of you hv tried to use against it, the fact that it is well struck. The dies were set for striking coppernickel, copper is a softer material and will fill the die better. (plus the obverse is mostly head. The material filled the void in the die rather than causing the cent planchet to expand.) But more telling, if you were to take a nickel and cut it down to match the weight, how do you get the well struck nickel down to the thickness of a cent without grinding down those well struck features?