I think I have a improper alloy mix 1980p penny error

Discussion in 'Error Coins' started by coinman2, Jul 11, 2020.

  1. JCro57

    JCro57 Making Errors Great Again

    No!

    It is important to get into these more difficult topics and not just stay where you're comfortable. It is how you learn.

    You will make mistakes. You will be 100% wrong. And that is OK. I have been wrong before. I will be wrong again. There is no shame in that.

    The wealthiest and most successful people in this world are those who stepped outside their comfort zone.

    Trust me on this point! :)
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. JCro57

    JCro57 Making Errors Great Again

    I cover these very topics and explain the differences in my upcoming book below, along with many other error types and fake/damaged coins that look like real errors. It will help many new to error collecting.

    FB_IMG_1594608579562.jpg
     
  4. Pickin and Grinin

    Pickin and Grinin Well-Known Member

    This design can easily be made with an eraser. Heck even I did a few of these in junior high.
    I am in the altered camp.
     
  5. TonkawaBill

    TonkawaBill Well-Known Member

    this is 1st have ever become aware of term ROLLER MARKS. Never to old to learn
     
    JCro57 and JeffC like this.
  6. coin_nut

    coin_nut Well-Known Member

    I love the look of 'woodies', and do not buy into the theory of 'improper alloy mix'. I know enough about metallurgy to realize that in a melt, the mixture of metals will become homogeneous and components equally distributed throughout the crucible.
     
  7. Diogenes Diaz

    Diogenes Diaz Active Member

    All I can add to this is that I got 4 woodies and they are all 1980
     
  8. coin_nut

    coin_nut Well-Known Member

    1974 ZA 2 cent woody. I was in South Africa in 1974, visited several port cities. 1974 ZA 2 c obv (2).JPG 1974 ZA 2 c rev (2).JPG
     
    Pickin and Grinin and Insider like this.
  9. Insider

    Insider Talent on loan from...

    JCro57, posted: "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.

    [Blush, and thank you.]

    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, [AFAIK, this is the first conversation we've had on the internet]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 [If the coin is an alteration].

    I'll write more later...

    I don't know who you are. I am an equal opportunity basher if I feel it is needed so I'm treating you the same way I communicate with someone in your field like Fred.

    You have added some very useful info in this thread so far but we disagree 100% on the only important coin here - the OP's! I can tell you probably know more about Mint errors than I do. That's because as a young professional, I had the ability to take error coins right to the Mint technicians for answers. I lost a great opportunity because mint errors were in the backwater of numismatics and frankly, as with 95% of numismatists, I didn't give a crap about them. All I needed to know was if it was possible for them to be made WITHOUT the help of man.

    AFAIAC, I have treated you with respect. If you feel like I'm trying to prove your opinion on the OP's coin is incorrect while WE BOTH educate others you are correct. If you cannot take the heat and refuse to state the obvious answers to my questions then let others respond. It appears others are scared off this discussion. SO I'LL START.

    Question 1. What do I see on the OP's coin?
    Answer 1. There are two different colors.

    Question 2. What else do others see?
    Answer 2.

    Question 3. What else do others see?
    Answer 3.

    What else do we see.

    After we answer the questions that my blind grandmother can see on the coin, we'll get to the reason for MY UNEDUCATED OPINION: Improper alloy mix. :D
     
  10. paddyman98

    paddyman98 I'm a professional expert in specializing! Supporter

    Start a separate thread with pictures! o_O
     
    Diogenes Diaz likes this.
  11. paddyman98

    paddyman98 I'm a professional expert in specializing! Supporter

    This is a true Woody!
    Capture+_2020-07-13-13-18-21.png
     
  12. JCro57

    JCro57 Making Errors Great Again

    Well, I guess so long as the abuse is equal I can accept that.

    But many copper cents tone different colors even when prepared properly, including blue and green.

    What else other than color streaks leads you to an improper mixture? Because if that is the case, I have about 1,000 improper mixtures.
     
  13. expat

    expat Remember you are unique, just like everyone else Supporter

    It is not stated anywhere in this thread if the lines are incused or raised. If debris etc was on the rollers the lines on the planchet would surely be slightly incused but why they are not "flattened out" by the pressure of the strike and flow of metal I don't know. This is the only observation I have as I know very little about either cause but am waiting expectantly for the answer
     
    Mountain Man and Insider like this.
  14. Insider

    Insider Talent on loan from...

    JCro57, asked: "What else other than color streaks leads you to an improper mixture?"

    You wrote the book! You are the error coin expert, not me. I've never heard of you :cigar::bookworm: (I'm not in CONECA) but I do know how hard it is to write a book. I've been working on one since 1985.

    This thread is supposed to be educational and not confrontational. Anyone who wishes can look at the OP's images and TELL US WHAT THEY SEE!
    Very reluctantly, I stated one obvious characteristic - the coin has two basic different colors. There are several other things that PROVE we are not looking at a coin with "roller marks."

    The member's post above is full of hints. :D
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2020
    paddyman98 likes this.
  15. Diogenes Diaz

    Diogenes Diaz Active Member

    I will -but I.m working on posting my weirdest coin and finding out how the error occurred
     
  16. Kentucky

    Kentucky Supporter! Supporter

    In a word, no. Metals mixed above the melt temperature of both are very viscous liquids. My most recent example...fix some oatmeal (I actually like it more for lunch than fro breakfast) and stir some peanut butter into it. Takes awhile, and on the way there, I have seen some "woodie" like sructures.
     
    Peter Economakis likes this.
  17. enamel7

    enamel7 Junior Member

    The lines are way too uniform for this to be a improperly mixed metal.
     
    JCro57 likes this.
  18. mikediamond

    mikediamond Coin Collector

    I am in full agreement with those who have diagnosed the OP's coin as having roller marks (roller stains). This effect is quite common in copper-alloy cents from the late 1970s and early 1980s. These coins do not show the cracking and peeling commonly seen in improper alloy mix errors. Roller marks are quite even while improper alloy mix streaks tend to vary in width. Roller marks are easily worn off while improper alloy mix streaks extend much deeper into the coin.
     
    JCro57, thomas mozzillo and enamel7 like this.
  19. Insider

    Insider Talent on loan from...

    enamel7, posted: "The lines are way too uniform for this to be a improperly mixed metal."

    Make sure you are posting about the first coin in the thread and not the others. If so, I disagree with you 100%. Just because they run in the same direction and tend to be parallel does not mean they are "uniform." Oops, another hint. :D

    Thanks for posting Mike. I disagree with you 100%. However, you actually "backed into" one of the characteristics I've been trying to drag out of anyone looking at the coin! :happy:

    mikediamond, posted: "I am in full agreement with those who have diagnosed the OP's coin as having roller marks (roller stains). This effect is quite common in copper-alloy cents from the late 1970s and early 1980s. These coins do not show the cracking and peeling commonly seen in improper alloy mix errors. Roller marks are quite even while improper alloy mix streaks tend to vary in width. Roller marks are easily worn off while improper alloy mix streaks extend much deeper into the coin."

    Folks, all you need is your two eyes. Anyone including a non-collector can describe what they see. Give it a try.:p

    So far, two different colors in various widths with a "streak-type appearance." What else do we see on the OP's coin to close the discussion?
     
  20. enamel7

    enamel7 Junior Member

    Ok, now I'm just seeing someone that wants to be argumentative. Of course I was replying about the original coin! Not my fault you have trouble comprehending. Obviously you convinced yourself long ago that you had coins that were bad alloy mix and now you refuse to except it. Why do we have to prove our view, but you don't yours? They are roller lines. The fact they are entirely uniform geometrically proves that. No way that happens randomly. Now your turn. Prove why they can't be roller lines.
     
  21. Oldhoopster

    Oldhoopster Member of the ANA since 1982

    I would expect the inhomogeneous regions of an improperly mixed alloy to be irregularly shaped in the cooled ingot. It seems very unlikely that they would elongate with such uniform widths as is seen in the OPs coin.

    IMO, this is due to marks from a dirty roller, not an improperly mixed alloy.
     
    JCro57 likes this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page