So should someone be fired for letting this out of the mint or is this an outstanding grind and solder job? The central portion of the torch on the reverse is missing but not most of what should be the overlaying ornamentation on either side. On the obverse there is a deformity from his front hairline to just below the nose/upper lip.
41 years old from the Mint year. <== That should be part of your initial analysis as it's had that much time to be damaged somehow.
Cupronickel, which is what the cladding is made from, has a higher melting point than the copper core. Wouldn't the inside melt before the cladding?
Enough heat can create a bubble between the clad layer and the copper core.. Not hot enough to melt anything.
There's no doubt that it's damaged but the nature of the damage is bizarre. The ornamentations to either side that slightly overlay the torch at a higher level than the torch handle are still mostly intact. It's very bizarre to say the least for it to be damaged in a way that kept the higher points of the coin intact yet destroy the lower areas surrounding.
Even if it were a true mint error it's nothing major for a mint employee to get fired for. There are true mint errors that are amazing! Here is one I purchased recently -
I see I was taken to literal. My apologies, I did not intend to imply that anyone should have lost their job over it only that it was a blatant deformity inconsistent with decades of wear.
