1994 or 1990

1994 closer

This might help a little more to see

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I can see it now. Looks like a dropped number. Hope it goes well for CONECA. Also should try sending pics to Coppercoins.com.To Chuck Daughtry.

 

looks like a 1994

 

Yup it's a 1994D

 

This post and a couple of others need to read the rest of the tread. The question has changed and now it looks like there is a 4 under the D mint mark. Or in other words D/4.

 

No, I see it. I was wondering why he just posted"IT LOOKS LIKE A 1994". I know what the possible error could be.

 

I knew it was something and not rot now that i see it it's a dropped number and will bring a nice premium good find.Well some experts just don't see and examine the coin enough and i don't want to mention names Wow Rot the poor guy would have threw the coin away if others didn't see this rare error.


JC

 

looks like a digit sized as on a dime piece.

 

Hi,

I am reading a lot of imagination based upon a lack of understanding of the minting process.

You can't have a 4/4 and you cant have a D/over or under the 4. The date and the mintmark are on the model used to create the master hubs, master dies, work hubs and work dies on 1994 D cents. Those details are not added later on in the processes of making dies.

Please don't add imaginary ways that the D or the 4 could be added in a way that you describe. It just doesn't happen that way. There are no repunched mintmarks after 1990 and there is no way to have a 4/4 since there is no such thing as a repunched date after 1909 on U.S. coinage.

Knowing what it can't be allows me to base an opinion on what it could be. Some kind of damage, most likely corrosion under the plating.

No disrespect intended, so please don't take offense. Folks who are not aware of the processes involved in minting U.S. coins should not offer guesses that make little sense. It is not the best thing to do to a newbie as they will learn the wrong thing and they will have hope that something is rare when it is simply a clunker.

Have Fun,
Bill

I'll wait to see what CONECA has to say on it too

 

So basically what your saying is, is that the 4 under the D is the result of post mint corrosion damage?

 

1990 or 1994

I appreciate your input and what you are saying is logical, but what we are all looking for is the flaw or error that IS NOT supposed to happen, that is why it is rare and sought after by collectors. Isn't part of the fun of it all is finding out?

 

If I understood the respondent of the suggestion that this is ghosting as a result of post mint corrosion, I have to say , I disagree.

 

You are , of course entitled to disagree but you have not offered a logical alternative.
For those of us who have seen this thousands upon thousands of times, what it is is as clear as day.

What is your alternative to corrosion under the plating?

 

Other than to say it is a minting process error, I really don't have an answer. But to suggest that plating corrosion is the source of the digit 4 appearing quite clearly UNDER the Mint Mark, and as a post mint process doesn't seem logical to me. I would somewhat agree with you, had the digit image disturbed the Mint Mark.

Tom

 

This may eventually fall under the category of the Mars Face or the lady that found a picture of Jesus on her grilled cheese sandwich, but I'm interested in hearing what the experts (coin in hand) think. It "looks" like there could be a "4" under the "D".

 

well, I'm going to put my penny's where my mouth is, and say there definitely is a 4 UNDER the D Mint Mark.

 

The problem here is that there is no minting process that can cause this. Offering that as an explanation is not solid and if you think about it, anything that is based upon something other than fact is a guess. Since you can't base your theory on fact, it has to, by definition be a guess.

The one part of the minting process that has a role in this is the fact that cents are made of copper-plated zinc since the time of a composition change in 1982. When they are struck, the dies can actually penetrate the copper plating leaving microsopic pores on the surface of the coin through which environmental factors can enter.

Zinc, being highly corrosive begins to decompose. It forms raised lines, spots, circles, you name it...under the surface of the plating. There are numerous examples of this in pictures on these forums.

The next thing that happens which was mentioned in another response is that human beings are trained to make sense of what they see. So, if a person sees a lump of rot that looks like a 4 on a coin, by gosh, they are going to say it's a 4. Following that bad assumption will be an attempt, often without facts, to make what is seen fit some picture of how it could happen. The fact that the scenario painted, or even in this case, NOT painted is impossible doesn't enter in the equation. It truly is the imagination working overtime.

The Minting process includes a finite set of circumstances starting from the design phase and ending with the struck coins. There is not one step of the process, that can create this on this particular coin.

Guesses are often made by persons with no real information pertaining to how a coin is made but knowing how a coin is made is vital when determining what a coin has or does not have on it.

A coin that has an unusual spot of rot, by the way, is not an error even if the spot of rot looks odd. \

Thanks,
Bill

 

I'm not seeing spots, I'm seeing a digit 4. Is this something like mass hysteria ? am I truly seeing a digit where there really is none? hmmmm please point out where the forum references are that discuss this process.

 

Very nice write up Bill. I know that when I started I had posted numerous coins that my "mind" said was errors without doing true research first. After I took the break and did some true research and studying I have found that the mind can be trained to elliminate alot of junk.