With all due respect @Insider , I am not some 2-bit coin hustler spewing ignorant information when it comes to identifying errors. Many people on here do, but that does not apply to everyone, including myself. Sure, i make mistakes sometimes. Not this time. I actually know what I am talking about here, and perhaps it is YOU who could use some practice on how to identify error types. Using CAPS and fancy colors does not make your (wrong) opinion more valid. Here is my similar example below. It is unequivocally parallel lines indicative of roller marks from dirty rollers which press planchet metal to their desired thickness. Now let's take a look at an unplated cent certified by ICG. It is clearly a damaged zinc cent which had its copper plating stripped, likely via acid. It has ZERO characteristics of a genuine unplated example. In fact, I have seen quite a few "certified" unplated cents by ICG that are simply damaged coins wrongly attributed as genuine ones. Sorry, but when it comes to properly identifying errors, I have much more confidence in my own abilities than many "experts" at the grading companies.
This is exactly why people should be humble and ask questions first, provide evidence, and maintain a non-combative approach when it comes to calling people out.
I'm with @Insider on this one. The marks on the OP coin don't look quite as "regimented" as on the "roller marks" coin. What do I know though...
OHRAH love your blunt but fair remarks as to the quality of a few of our so called CT experts... I'm sure they know who they are. I am also impressed with the quality of several of CT's qualified experts that explain there impression with experience, professionalism, and courtesy. I am not qualified to answer you request but would enjoy hearing from the best of the best. Thanks for the post be safe.
Mr.Q, posted "OHRAH love your blunt but fair remarks as to the quality of a few of our so called CT experts... I'm sure they know who they are. I am also impressed with the quality of several of CT's qualified experts that explain there impression with experience, professionalism, and courtesy. I am not qualified to answer you request but would enjoy hearing from the best of the best. Thanks for the post be safe." I agree with your post; however, you and the others HAVE NOT ANSWERED my questions. Hopefully, all you guys who say they are roller marks will give it a try and the folks who know better will not help you. I don't belong to the spoon-fed generation so I tossed away the spoon for coin chats. You retain what you learn by working things out with your own eyes. I DON'T TRUST ANY EXPERT on anything coin related because I have been correct when up against the best. I have also been incorrect on occasion when up against the best. It is humbling but that's how I learn. If you were in my class, I would simply ask the same question. What do you see on the coin? That will give you the answer - best of all, you would have figured it out without much help at all. PS As usual, this thread is all gummed up now with images of coins THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OP's COIN OR QUESTION.
JCro57, posted: "With all due respect @Insider , I am not some 2-bit coin hustler spewing ignorant information when it comes to identifying errors. Many people on here do, but that does not apply to everyone, including myself. Sure, i make mistakes sometimes. Not this time. I actually know what I am talking about here, and perhaps it is YOU who could use some practice on how to identify error types. Using CAPS and fancy colors does not make your (wrong) opinion more valid. Here is my similar example below. It is unequivocally parallel lines indicative of roller marks from dirty rollers which press planchet metal to their desired thickness. View attachment 1144618 View attachment 1144619 Now let's take a look at an unplated cent certified by ICG. It is clearly a damaged zinc cent which had its copper plating stripped, likely via acid. It has ZERO characteristics of a genuine unplated example. In fact, I have seen quite a few "certified" unplated cents by ICG that are simply damaged coins wrongly attributed as genuine ones. View attachment 1144631 View attachment 1144632 Perhaps you should send it in for review.
JCro57, post: 4625148, member: 92083"]Still confident it is not an improper alloy mixture and is simply roller marks." You are the error expert. Please describe the different characteristics between the two (alloy & roller) for those of us who wish to know.
An improper alloy mixture is just that: The alloy (i.e. molten metals which fuse and form one solid metallic mass vs. pressed together like clad or plated like zinc Lincoln cents) has been compromised and the mixture of its contents is not proper. It could be that impurities/contaminants corrupted the mixture (dust, dirt, etc.), or that the percentages of the ingredients is off significantly, or it could be that some of the metallic particles didn't fully melt completely, or a combination of these. In any of these cases, improper alloy mixes can sometimes result in various color patterns that are abnormal. They can appear as stripes, blotches, irregular patterns, shades, and can compromise the integrity of the metal itself resulting in laminations, cracks, splitting, and other planchet defects, but many show no signs of laminations or cracks. Here are 2 coins I own which are improper alloy mixtures.
Roller marks by comparison are lines caused when specks of dirt, grease, or other contaminants adhere to rollers which press planchet strips to a desired thickness. The debris is normally pressed into planchet metal forming incredibly straight, linear, fine parallel lines as the planchet strip is fed through the rollers. Keep in mind that roller marks can appear on any coin - even improper mixtures. The OP's coin does appear to have a minor lamination on Lincoln's face. This could be caused from an improper mixture. However, those lines on the OP's coin are absolutely in line with roller marks, and match them on not one side, but both. This is actually a very easy call im my opinion. Here are more roller marks.
JCro57, posted:...improper alloy mixes can sometimes result in various color patterns that are abnormal. They can appear as stripes, blotches, irregular patterns, shades, and can compromise the integrity of the metal itself resulting in laminations, cracks, splitting, and other planchet defects. While I consider roller marks to be planchet defects they can resemble some patterns of an improper mix when they run across a coin as streaks. I have yet to see a coin with roller marks that are not into the coin because they have been struck out fully.
I'm not interested to see ANY COIN you are posting. I'm writing about the OP's coin - PERIOD. Your examples DO NOT MATCH HIS coin because they are not the same thing. BTW, your examples of dirty rollers is very informative for all of us.
The Mint stopped making their own planchets long before 1980. As I posted, I have yet to see alloy errors on modern cents.
@Insider I respect you very much in this industry. You are a very tough grader and I find few in this industry get the grades right consistently as you do. You instantly gave ICG a credibility boost, and every serious collector knows that. However, I don't know why you seem to go into attack mode against people when it comes to judging errors, and more than once you have been less than polite to me in particular, despite me being a client of yours many times over regardless of what grading company you worked for. Disagreeing is one thing; belittling people is something else and it is not a good marketing or business strategy. The reason I posted that unplated cent certified by ICG was to make a point, which should be obvious.
Yesterday, I knew nothing about Roller Marks vs. Improper Alloy Mixes. Today, I know the terms and I know that I can't tell them apart. By the way, are "Woodies" a nickname for Improper Alloy Mixes? I wish these were live classes.
@Insider As a full-time educator and a former Treasury agent who depended on compiling evidence for prosecution, I can't disagree with you more on the merits of my comparative examples. Do you honestly not see the similarity of these marks on the OP's coin (Top) and mine? (Bottom) How else are you supposed to learn if you don't illustrate your points with actual examples?
The term woodie is a general term that makes a coin appear to have a wood grain to it. It can be from improper mixtures, roller marks, staining, environmental damage, etc.
Thank you. I like your 2-cent illustration. I can see the unevenness, as in wood grains. Although the lines run uni-directionally, they're not consistently parallel, so I can see that that one isn't roller marks. For now, I'll stick to the easier topics. Lol.