Any opinions on this '99-D penny?

Lincoln's hair is distorted or flattened. I'm not sure if the forehead is, too, or not. Whatever happened made a slight difference in the appearance on the reverse, as well. It's pretty clearly off-center.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I believe you, but can't help wondering how one damages a coin like that without damaging the material it's clad with.

I gather it's off-centeredness is of no significance.

Later or tomorrow, I'll put up a quarter I'm quite sure must be damaged, too, but not certain...the edges have a couple of flat spots that may be small clips, as you called them.

I think there're other "potential" coins around the house...will post as I find. Again, thanks so much for your time.

 

Heck, if the folks who do that stuff would put as much effort into actually EARNING money, they'd get further...

"Educated" is the one thing my guesses can't be called, so I really do appreciate the benefit of your guesses!

 

could be a weak struck penny....which are common

 

This coin is not damaged. It was struck through oil, grease, or a similar smooth, viscous fluid. The stuff often accumulates in the deepest recesses of the die face, which is why Lincoln's head looks flattened. The streaky appearance on the obverse and the reverse represents the original streakiness of the unstruck planchet. The fluid has no texture of its own, so manages to preserve the original surface texture of the planchet.

 

I'm guessing it's still worth about a penny? I'd have to have something worth a significant number of dollars to consider it worth giving it up as a keepsake, anyhow...still it's nice to know.

What amuses me most is that the two pennies I had the least expectations of are the only ones that actually came from their mints that way!

 

I think I would have to disagree with the grease assessment. The weak areas on obv and reverse correspond to each other. If there were grease on the obv that should not affect the reverse. Plus, the flat head looks just that – flat. Grease (in my limited experience) does not look like this but rather has a contoured area, since the grease will flow as it sees fit. This looks too flat to me.

Just my opinion.

P.s. .- I strongly encourage people who are learning about errors to get some tools and spend an afternoon messing with some coins. Also, learn about the fine points of the minting process. With all of this experience, you will more easily understand why certain things are or are not a mint error. I spent some time drilling, hammering, etc. coins in my youth, and it was very helpful to me knowledge of coins.

 

The viscous fluid was on both faces, affecting areas of the design and the field. It can be rather patchy in its distribution. These sorts of strike-through errors are extremely common on zinc cents. In most cases, the extent of the affected area is modest. In extreme cases much of the design on one or both faces can be obliterated. The most commonly affected areas are the top of Lincoln's head and the base of his bust. It always looks flattened and always has that streaky appearance. But almost any area can be affected. It is helpful to understand that dies can be filled by a variety of materials, some coarse and some smooth. For reasons I don't quite understand, zinc cents are frequently coated and filled by this smooth fluid, which I suspect is oil. If you take a large sample of uncirculated or minimally circulated zinc cents, you will undoubtedly find similar-looking specimens.

 

If only the coins could talk, huh?

 

Here's a more severe example:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3957383255

 

And another...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3956485371

 

Both of those pictures show coins that appear dull. Is it relevant that the one in question is shiny, even in the affected area?

 

It's all the same stuff, just different thicknesses and levels of coverage. Luster may vary, but the flattish design, the persistence of planchet streaks, and the weakening of peripheral design elements, all indicate the same material is involved. When coverage is heavy, the effective striking pressure is increased, and so the rim is very well struck and may be prolonged vertically into a "fin" as metal squeezes into the gap between die neck and collar.

 

The coins vary in appearance as the result of the thickness and extent of coverage of the obstructing material. Luster may vary, but the flattish design, weakened peripheral design elements, and persistence of planchet streaks indicate it's all the same stuff. When coverage is heavy, effective striking pressure is increased, so you often end up with a very well-struck rim that may extend vertically into a "fin" as metal squeezes into the gap between die neck and collar.

 

flattened hair on lincolns head

Here is a link to a 2000 D Lincoln
cent that clearly shows the hair flattened, it is struck on a foriegn planchet of unknown type.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=3957416188&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT

 

Looks very much the same doesn't it? A bit more off-center, and in a different direction. And pricey, too, though it doesn't look as if they got any bids!

What does "struck on a foreign planchet of unknown type," MEAN?

 

the coin was made from a metal intended for another country. the type of metal and the country intended is unkown.