92? close AM,struck thru grease...ect.

Ok...ive been staring at this thing for a while now trying to figure out what exactly i am looking at,lol. Ive turned it a million diff angles trying to figure out if this is really a 92,or if my brain is just telling me it is. I would love to have some diff opinions and any insight on this wierd coin that i can get. It was obv struck thru grease...the design looks very odd and is quite thick,is that from a late stage die deteriation...or? Also,it looks like some doubling in the columns on the back and possibly in the lettering on the front. Any help is appreciated.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Interesting , close am for sure.


<iframe width="642" height="361" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hQG9iEVp_Ro" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

Welcome to Coin Talk. IMO it is a close AM struck from a grease filled die. From your photos I'm not convinced it's a 1992. It could be a 98 or 99. Wait for more experienced member's opinions. Maybe they can tell from the position of the mint mark or another diagnostic marker.

 

Concur 100%. Photos do not allow us to determine year. Based on odds, it’s likely not a 2, but could be. More photos of the date please.

 

the 92's are a transitional reverse, your going to have to research that find the markers to identify it as a 92.

 

Im on it,1 sec and ill post them. Date aside,does the profile of Lincoln look super odd to anyone elce? And if it does turn out to be a 92 ,could it actually be attributed with it being so faint and struck thru?

 

That’s a question someone like @Rick Stachowski would best be able to answer. I’m not familiar with any specific die markers, but I’m sure they exist.

 

This is part of one.

 

Yours differs from the fg picture of a known 92 D close am, but keep looking. may still be.

 

I take that back, with a closer look. it looks the same. ya get more insight on this.

 

I just realized you have more photos as thumbnails. I’m afraid you likely have a 1999-D Cent. Those are supposed to be close AM. The curve of the last number is too much and it’s too close. Look at these photos for comparison.

 

Hey TN check this out, closeups pcgs coinfacts.
https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1992-d-1c-close-am-bn/83099

 

Have to agree with Seattlite

 

Crap I was pulling for ya, I wanted it to be a 92, sorry man.

 

I respectfully disagree with it being a 9. I still see a 2 tbh...who knws,maybe ill sell it on ebay as a "Mystery" date for 35k,lol. Sorry for the delay,here are more photos

 

I have a very similar example that I just recently found and am having a hard time discerning my last number too. I hope you don’t mind me piggybacking your thread.

 

Now that looks like it could be a 2.

 

I have a post in the Coin Chat Forum called, “In God We Tru”. Could I ask you to have a look there and give me your opinion?

 

I respectfully believe you see a 2 because you want to see a 2. Nothing about that last number indicates a 2. 8 or 9 because of the curvature of the number. It’s too close and has too much of a curve for a 2. Sorry, but if I saw this coin listed as a 1992-D on eBay, I would report it for fraudulent listing practices. @paddyman98 @Rick Stachowski @JCro57 @furryfrog02 anyone see a 2 here?

 

Ez now,...thats just my opinion,no need to be so hostile