Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;foundinrolls, post: 502789, member: 4350&quot;]Hi,</p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;m gonna throw something into the mix here on those two coins.&nbsp; To start with they look to be early 1980s,&nbsp; I am putting them around 1983 or 84,&nbsp; probably Philadelphia mint.</p><p><br /></p><p>They were still working out the details on how to strike decent copper-plated zinc cents.</p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;ve seen many where those areas consistently are weakly struck.&nbsp; Some are due to the dies being overly dressed (polished) after a die clash.&nbsp; Some are simply poor strikes.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>I don&#039;t believe these (the coins seen above) are struck through, grease filled dies.&nbsp; In fact on one of my websites,&nbsp; I have a series of photos that spans across almost two decades of Lincolns showing this same anomaly in essentially the same place.&nbsp; I have seen literally thousands of these and it is highly unlikely that grease filled all those dies over almost two decades in exactly the same way in exactly the same place.</p><p><br /></p><p>The opposite side of the coin where this anomaly is seen on the reverse lines up with the largest part of Lincoln&#039;s bust on the obverse of the coin.&nbsp; The demand for metal needed to fill the bottom of Lincoln&#039;s bust during the strike effects the amount of metal available to fill in the recesses of the die on the reverse.&nbsp; The areas effected are the ones seen above.&nbsp; These are more likely than not coins that are effected by the strike itself and not by any grease.</p><p><br /></p><p>Thanks,</p><p>Bill[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in