2000 D Lincoln "steel? silver? aluminum?" penny?!?!?

I've had this one since 1988. When I bought it it was ANACS 64/64 certified. I sent it to NGC 3 or 4 years ago and they also graded it an MS64 unplated Lincoln.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

If I'm remembering right the OP didn't just mention steel they also mentioned silver and aluminum. Hobo you need to take a break and calm down. We all know that the coin we are talking about here was not steel because the mint has never made a steel cent coin since 1943 as far as I know so we do not need a magnet to examine them. give these new collectors a break every now and them and enjoy this website with the folks that needs to learn about coins..

 

Looks just like the chemistry project I did in highschool. I don't remember exactly how to do it, but there was a chemical I believe? that turned the copper silver color, then you heat the silver colored cent over a bunson burner and it turns it into a gold color. I remember I made a silver and gold one. I still have the gold one but the silver wore off the other one.

 

I have a 2000 D penny looks like it's made of aluminum a charcoal color and is almost the size of a nickel a little egg shape. It weighs 2.5g or .09oz the same as a penny. It has not been flattened and the ridge around it is flared a little more a normal penny. It was giving to me in some change the other day for as a nickel

 

What's the question?

 

First, welcome to the neighborhood, Norman!

You need to post clear photos of both sides. Otherwise, we would just be guessing.

It's usually a good idea to start a new thread when you have a coin with a different date/mintmark and/or anomaly that is peculiar to it. It makes it easier for you to refer back to the thread in the future.

Chris

 

I don't care for the zinc cents. But that unplated 1986-D MS 64 is very nice.

 

Heres kne i just found

 

What about it? It's a worn down Copper plated zinc Cent. I have seen hundreds of those.

 

[RE: "rascal, post: 1111631, member: 29239"]

While not speaking to the issues being raised about the particular coin under discussion, I must disagree with your statement of, “. . . is it really hard for you to understand that all coins when first made have mint luster and what do they look like after a few years . They sure as heck will lose that luster.” “Luster” has nothing to do with how a coin looks; how shiny a coin may look as it’s lying on a table. In fact, a coin that has been highly polished can be very “Shiny”, but will have no “Luster”.

Luster is the differential reflection of light from the nearly microscopic ridges on a coin. These ridges come from the flow of metal (from the planchet) across the face of the die during the striking process, which eventually forms many microscopic grooves on the die face after the die has struck many coins. A brand new die will impart no luster making ridges on a minted coin; as the die ages, it will develop more metal flow lines (grooves) and impart more luster making ridges on a coin; at some point the die face may be polished and what you will see on the coin will be “die scratches”, with very few flow line ridges . . . that is until the die has once again struck some number of additional coins such that the flow line grooves will once more appear on the die, and the resulting ridges on the coin.

Given this, a truly uncirculated coin that is stored in such a way as to protect it from environmental forces, that could erode the flow line ridges on the coin, will never lose its luster. In the final analysis, a coin that displays “luster” will continue to display luster unless the metal flow line ridges that produces “Luster” are eroded away by mechanical or chemical means. If I have oversimplified, or in any way misstated the process, I’ll be grateful to be corrected.

Semper Fidelis

 

Probably not from "rascal", though, who made those posts in 2011 and hasn't visited CoinTalk since this past January...

 

Duh, maybe I need to start taking a closer look at the "dates" on these posts; though Lord knows why a post from 2017 was appended to the a post originally from 2010 . . . the aluminum maybe? Oh never mind . . . Blush, Blush.

 

I have a 2000 D Lincoln penny also, it’s a little larger than the usual penny, lighter weight, and dark, almost a blackish color.
penny

 

Start your own unique thread with pictures! Sounds like Post Mint Damage.

 

I have the same kind of coin 2000 D

 

yo, i just found one of these 2000, silvers,, i think the fire idea is out of the question,, just remember to keep all your strange finds, even a 40 year collector will deem something fake just cause they dont have it.. nice find

 

Jaimie, that cent above is not an error, and
has had the copper plating removed.

And, if I can say, I have to laugh everytime
a novice says that a dealer is jealous of their
coin, and will say it's fake because they don't
have it.


That's absolutely ridiculous, and in fact, in
47 years of being a full time numismatist,
I've never heard of anyone saying a coin is
a damaged/altered coin because they were
jealous.


Yes, you're not the first one to say it, but it
always, always, comes from someone who
simply doesn't want to believe what numerous
experienced collectors or dealers say about
their coin. I know we can be the 'bearer of
bad news' to folks, but certainly not for the
reason you gave above.

I don't know you, so I'm not attacking you
personally, just that statement - it's ludicrous.

 

everyone's entitled to there own opinion, jealousy was not my point there, the mint is a working job just like other jobs and can be mishaps too,, who like paperwork?, i may be novice but not dumb, unrecorded events do happen, this is america, how many off alloyed 2000D cents do you need to see to believe another persons word?, thats my question, there will always be strange coming out of the mints, i dont care how "sworn"they are, i know my 2000 is not steel, also described as the original post, you know why i dont believe a collector,? i have been misdirected by one thats why,, if you have so many years under your belt, why dont you investigate the penny instead of say its removed plating,? you "collectors" are always quick to say somethings fake, just due to the "book" well i think thats crap life will go on, anyway, the penny is in some way a messup or a test, common sense is a good thing to roll with, multiple findings of the same thing,, sounds fake to me, LOl,

 

@jamie s pieper sorry to hear you may have been misdirected by a dealer/collector at one time or another. I have not been doing this very long myself and still learning by means of research vast knowledge of people on this website such as paddyman98 and Fred Weinberg. (Many many more btw) It also helps to get to know people here before making such statments and bieng so disrespectful as you did above IMO. You might try doing this by googling the name Fred Weinberg.................
https://www.thesprucecrafts.com/fred-weinberg-profile-768771