1981 off metal penny

You're good. Don't take everything you read here seriously or to heart.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/646/

Now make sure you read the entire article. There were experiments a few years before the production of the 1982 Lincoln zinc coins. Mix ups and mistakes happen, this is why some search for the copper 1983 penny. We all should think outside the box, never know what you may come across.

 

I can't help but to think comparing your claim to the 1983 "copper" cents somewhat of a false equivalence. The existence of one can quite reasonably be explained. The other? Not so much.

That said, as much as I can understand and respect the idea of thinking outside the box, the fact is that this type of thing causes more problems than it's ever been worth in this hobby. Simply applying the basic concept behind Occam's Razor, with a healthy dose of Hanlon's, seems to work out peachy the vast majority of the time.

 

I respect your opinion. My comparison covered the entire transition period. From 1981 the start of production to 1983 the so called complete transition. In 1982 there was a mixture of both copper and the new zinc. With that being said, it makes sense to me to search all three years. In the end it's all opinions, but insulting and setting limitations for curious minds is a deterrent for newbie hobbyist.

 

Having worked in new product development and pilot plant lines, I can tell you that it’s very unlikely that a sample or test piece will be mixed into a production run. Most of the initial development and testing is done on equipment that is not part of the production process. I don’t know the mint’s product development process, but I’m pretty confident that they didn’t grab a handful of experimental planchets and run them through the press in the middle of a work day.

Even if you’re running tests on production equipment, there are numerous engineers, techs, and operators monitoring the run, collecting data, and generally watching the process. Every effort is made to account for all experimental parts, and the production line is thoroughly checked (and cleaned if needed) both before and after the run. I won’t say that it’s impossible for a prototype part to make it into the production stream, but the possibility is significantly lower than a transition error due to changing the production process (job changes, etc).

It’s easy to understand how a transition error 1983 Copper cent can occur. Of the Billions of copper planchets running through the high speed process in 1982, it’s certainly possible for them to get stuck and dislodged (i.e., 1943 copper cent, 1982-D Small date copper, et al.). The fact that these transitions errors are so incredibly rare, even with the much greater opportunity for them to occur, makes me strongly believe that the prototype errors you’re searching for have a very negligible probability of existing, at least without “help” from employees.

Hope this information helps