1982 snowman

I'm not trying to target anybody I have my opinoin on the subject but Bill can get a little sarcastic in his remarks, and i will defend myself ,Whatever his credentials are i respect that ,but if you want to make remakes and tell me I;m wrong on my opnion do it in a better manner or PM me instead of approaching it like the way he does .

Thank You
Jazzcoins Joe

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

To PM someone that their information given is incorrect leaves the incorrect info out there to be improperly accepted by others that don't know better. Bill gets sarcastic because he has repeatedly asked that people try not to give opinion as fact. If I give incorrect information I sure hope that someone will set the record straight! If I'm more worried about my ego than the truth then I should go collect POGS.

The issue here wasn't whether there have ever been coins that have been struck by corroded dies but the fact that this coin WASN'T struck that way!

Bill's concern about misinformation is proven in the OP's latest statement. the coin is NOT from a pitted die, there is no DDO, nor is ther any MD. The coin simply shows a very common condition that is present to some degree on most 1982 Zincolns.

The condition was properly ID'd by Hobo and then you confused the OP your comment.

People come here to learn, but to learn misinformation is worse than no information at all.

Please make sure what you are talking about applies to the coin in question BEFORE posting.

My two cents

Richard

 

I was joking about calling it pitted DDO MD.

 

I'm very glad to hear that, but it still shows where the potential for misunderstanding exists.

 

Well said ziggy9

 

Hi,

Frank, I agree.

I am a little more specific though to this particular coin. You are 100% right that contaminants were between the zinc core and the plating. We can't be sure which contaminant such as the ones you listed are involved in this kind of damage on this particular coin.

The end result is the that the bubbles which weren't there at the moment of strike developed between the zinc and the plating due to one of the contaminants that you mentioned.

You added a good piece of information to this thread!

Thankya Sir!
Bill

 

Jazzcoins Joe

 

There are hundreds of pitted dies that were used to mint Canadian coins. Some of the semi-collectible ones are:

1963 One Cent -Dot inside 9
1964 One Cent -Dot above 9

1944 Five Cents -Dot between 1 and 9
1947 Five Cents -Dot above beavers tail
1948 Five Cents -Dot below 8
1957 Five Cents -Dot between 5 and 7

1954 Ten Cents -Two Dot's below date
1955 Ten Cents -Dot below 5
1956 Ten Cents -Dot below 95
1956 Ten Cents -Multiple Dots below date
1957 Ten Cents -Dot on 7

1957 Twenty-Five Cents -Dot between 5 and 7
1965 Twenty-Five Cents -Dot between 6 and 5

1958 Fifty Cents -Dot below last A in Canada
1994 Fifty Cents -"G" Dot

1966 One Dollar -Dot below 8

That was just a minor sidetrack that you added. It still has nothing to do with the 1982 cent.

I'm (almost) done with this.

Thanks,
Bill

 

The dime you talked about was a terminology issue. Die Chip versus Die Break...

Here is what Ken P. said about your coin in an email to me after i sent him an email containig a picture of your coin.

"Bill,
What is on the back of Roosevelt's head is what I'd call a die break; others may refer to it as a die chip -- to me they are one in the same just the size being the determining factor which is at best usually going to be subjective.

Take care!
Ken"

Notice he said, size determines what its called, he also said size is subjective. AND...he said that what he calls a die break, others would call a die chip.

I'm one of the others.

Thanks,

Now I'm Done,
Bill

 

I'm done with this, i think its a major example because it does happen on Us cents and its possible the 82 hapened to be just what i said in spit of what you and others think the dot is no gas bubble it;s to conformed an solid and raised on the surface of a the coin that's my theory .that is all i will say


peace to you and be healthy I'm out of this thread

Jazzcoins joe

 

But You still gave the wrong terminolgy of what it really is and mike diamond even said it was an interior die break and ken also said it was a die break if you recall and the size of it is so larger than a die chip ,so how could you even think it's it a die chip so you still gave the wrong terminolgy professor or of coin world if you want to get technical that which you are


So please don't confuse the novices with the wrong terms and give out bad information .So the way i see it you really don;t no the differance between a simple die chip to a simple die break. Wow



I just hate when the wrong terminolgy is givin

Jazzcoins joe





I
i'M out of here Jazzcoins Joe

 

:rolling:Jazz it's time for your meds now.
A Die Chip is like taking a hammer and knocking a chip out of a concrete slab. A die crack/break is like the concrete slab cracking linear over a distance. Replace the word "concrete slab" with "coin die" and there you have it. When the coin is struck, the metal flow upwards into the chip, crack, break and forms a raised area on the coin. (borrowed this description)

 

Jazzcoins,
If you hate when wrong information is give then why do you insist on giving it about this coin? It is common knowledge throughout the numismatic world that Lincoln cents 1982 and later are very prone to this type of gas bubble problem, yet you insist that it is a pitted die. When you find me a dozen more 1982 Lincoln cents with identicle markings then i will believe you, until then this is just what it has been stated to be...Gas bubbles.

Richard

 

I don;t take meds i;m very young and i will not give you my age it may shock you

What i'm getiing at here is the correct terminolygy there is a differrance between a die chip, die break, yes the size matters it is different in the term because of it;s size

,
Would you call a fat lady a skiiny lady is fat the same as skinny get my point even through i did go, out with a lot of fatties.

I suggest you look up the definition of each term and they are all defined in a different way size that matters

:loud:Rockdude you borrowed that your cheating:secret:
jazzcoins joe

 

Ok..I'm gonna jump back in now. The mark beside the 2 seems like a bubble that popped the cooled. Kinda like a volcano. The bottom one under the 8 popped then fell in. The "bump" under the 1 looks like the "bump" beside the 2 that didn't pop. Seem correct?

 

So now that you heard from us, what is your final word about the description of this coin?

 

fish
I'm willing to bet that if you press on that other bubble with a toothpick it will have give to it which would end this once and for all.

richard

 

Jazz
I believe that foundinrolls point was that size is subjective. one man's fat is another mans pleasantly plump is anothe man's obese is another man's just right. Unless you know of a place that list that less than .xx mm is a chip and more than .xx mm is a break then the terms aren't exact. that is to say your die break can be foindinrolls die chip.

in this case your being right doesn't make him wrong because it is a matter of view point.

Richard

 

POP !!!
It's over!!!!

 

Thank you!