Discussion in 'Coin Chat' started by Wilddavy, Oct 22, 2019.
Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.
What's that mean plated ? Like with what. I guess
To funny my wife said the same thing lol
By the way.. A magnet would pull on a metal that is ferromagnetic.. Not the other way around.
Mr obvious lol.
Zinc Cents are plated with a thin layer of copper. Reprocessed 1943 Cents are plated. You can take a copper cent and apply nickel to the coin. Now it's plated.
But thanks for help. Lol
If it was struck on a wrong planchet, what planchet and where did it come from? No other US coin around that year is magnetic, and the mint has not struck coins for other countries since 1984 (except the iceland 1000 Kr in 2000, MUCH too large) This make the chance of a wrong planchet almost zero, and the chance of it being nickel plated many orders of magnitude more likely.
Try this site it mite help you like it did me The one in the picture is a 1997. Weird huh real head scratcher since they stoped in 84 you say lol.
If you're certain it was struck on the wrong planchet, why didn't you provide the weight?? That is the quickest and easiest way to prove/disprove wrong planchet errors. But since it's magnetic, it can't be a US coin as @Conder101 said. The pic you show in post 14 isn't a coin struck on a foreign planchet. It actually looks like an unplated cent, but I suppose it could be a dime planchet (they didn't provide the weights or details of the pictured coin. What help is that?) So Conder101's comment isn't really that much of a head scratcher, is it?
This issue of Mint error news has a link to a large spread sheet with every foreign coin type made at the US mint. It also lists weights, compositions and size. You can do some research to see if there are any that match the size and weight of your coin and were struck near 2006 or shortly before. BTW: I'm sure that someone with as much experience as Conder101 is familiar with this link
That article you point to has a strange anomaly to it
(1) if you read the entire article, for instance the last paragraph, you'll see what the other posters are asking ..
(2) the article you refer to on https://varietyerrors.com/wrong-planchet-coin-error-price-guide/, lifted the image with the 1997 D and 1961 D from CoinTalk from Feb 2013.
The 1997 D and 1961 D from CoinTalk from Feb 2013 as is seen in this CT thread
Thus the article's image of the 1997 D and 1961 D cents have no correlation to the article. And is just plain bizarre @GDJMSP
And the article only identifies cents up to 1965 on their chart.
The very next video shows nickel plating. Fun with chemistry.
They don't specifically say it is on a different planchet, give a weight or any other information. To me it looks like it is slightly larger than the 1961 but the lettering is all the way out by the rim. That wouldn't be possible
If it was on a dime planchet it would be smaller and part of the lettering would be off the coin
Thank you clawcoin for tracking down the source of the image. No plating, larger than it should be, a "Texas cent" (Regular cent put between tow pieces of leather and beaten, it causes the coin to increase in size proportionally. And for some reason when done with zinc cents causes them to lose their plating.)
Separate names with a comma.