Hi Folks, I'm a new member and I'm dying to ask about this coin. I'm new to coins but not a total novice...I have been into errors for the past year or so, and spent most of my time finding errors that aren't really errors (like most people I presume). I only have two grades for error coins now..."knee-slappers" and "jaw droppers". But, I'm trying to keep it simple. The S was visible to me almost to the naked eye, that's what got me looking to begin with. It is striking to me how the S is right in the center of the D. I haven't seen many OMM's that are that clear and centered(although there may be plenty). Also, if you look you may notice that there is a continuous rough pattern or grain, similar to that of cloth, covering both sides of the coin. I'd like to know if anyone has ever heard of this error for this year, and if the fact that it is also struck-through would increase it's value, being a multiple error coin? Here are the pics, they are the best I could do. Hopefully, they show enough to allow you to extend your opinion on the coin. I appreciate your insights. After looking, please consider if this is a coin that I should get slabbed, and if valuable, what should I insure it for? If there have been no more of these found, would that make it a discovery coin? Not trying to get egotistical, lol, just wondering. Thank you.
First of all......nicely took pictures. I wish I had that much lucky with photos. Two: the "s" that I am seeing looks to be backwards within the D. Is that the same "s" you saw? If so, it looks reveresed to me, which would lead me to think it would be a dropped lettter instead of a OMM. I dont errors much at all, if ever, and 99% of what I think I know I learned form the folks here. They should be able to help you out much much more than I. Welcome aboard to Cointalk and good luck!!!!
Hi Sappernurse, Thanks for the quick reply, and the pleasant welcome. The pics turned out ok, but they are alot of work to get good ones. The S that I see in the middle of the D mintmark is not reversed, it is just a regular S mintmark to my eye, complete with the fat seriph finishing the bottom of the S. Honestly, if it were backwards to me, I wouldn't have even bothered posting it, as a backwards letter may have most likely came from another coin and not struck from a die. I learned that one the hard way, lol. I didn't think it was too difficult to see, but I might post another pic later with a graphic showing the outline of the S or something. We'll see what happens. Thanks again.
If this is a D/S wouldn't that mean that the die was originally prepared to be used to mint proof coins, and then repunched to be used on criculation coins? Does that ever happen? I thought that mintmarks are now done on the master die (I'm not sure I'm calling it the right thing) and not punched into the individual dies. Because of this, we will no longer see one mm stamped over another. Am I correct?
If I'm not mistaken the mintmarks were punched by hand through 1989 and 1990 is when they switched to having the mintmarks on the master die. As to the roughness of the coin. They appear to be small micro bubbles or seperation of the plating... very common for cents from 1982 - 1990+ as they were still trying to perfect the bonding to the zinc core after they switched from copper. It does not appear to be any sort of "strike through" Now the "mintmark S" you are refering to I do see it but I'm just not convinced its a OMM ... I see a small die crack or cud south and to the east on the outside rim of the D mintmark. On the inside of the D I so see the slight resemblence of an "S" but it is smaller than what "S" mintmark would be . Frankly I think your coin is interesting, but I think its still worth just 1 cent... I hope I'm wrong and someone comes along with more insight than I, and can shed further light on your coin!! Thanks for posting!! DAK
That looks like a but of crud, that is similar to the S. Kinda like the moustache that Lincoln is wearing in the picture.
There is no D/S on this coin, merely too much grease around the D, causing it to be struck with the extra relief bit.
There's no error here. The "D/S mintmark" is simply a case of subsurface corrosion pushing up the overlying copper plating. Copper plating often splits to the right of the D-mintmark allowing corrosion of the exposed zinc. This corrosion spreads and pushes up the surrounding copper plating. Aside from that, your coin shows blistered plating. This is evidently due to the presence of contaminants between the zinc core and the copper plating which prevents a solid bond from forming. The heat of the strike causes gas expansion which pushes up the blisters. It's very common. Blisters can also be caused by subsurface corrosion.
Wow, alot of interesting responses! It opened my eyes up to new ways of looking at it. Thank you all very much! Oh well, you can't win 'em all. I appreciate each of these thoughtful responses, regardless of the spirit in which they are (sometimes) given. By that I mean : Some people love to give you bad news, other people hate to give bad news. Either way, it's news to me I'll be posting another coin momentarily...I'm pretty sure this next one is an error, lol, but I'd love to know exactly what kind. It just might give your brain something to chew on, lol. Til the next post!
The change over for the business strike coins was a gradual thing with a different denomination being switched over from hand punched to having the mintmark on the original master design each year or every other year. The cents were the las denomination to be switched over in 1990. But in 1985 ALL of the proof dies had the mintmark placed on the master design.
