That is considered an error and not a design change. The mint never intended for the CAM design to be struck as a proof, and the WAM design (after 1992) wasnt intended to be struck as a business strike. 1993 was the only year of the CAM proof, after that they went back to the WAM designs.
Ah, I see. I updated my post after you replied with the following: I see you did cover the satin finish cents with your selections for 2009 bronze. But then, there is the 2010 satin finish shield cent.
2009 bronze is a satin coin. Is there some reason you are not including the 2005 - 2008 SMS (AKA satin) and the 2010.
Thank you, I did not know that. TBH, I did absolutely no research after 2009. The memorials had me busy all day lol
BTW, an interesting side note. The rarest Lincoln (i.e. lowest mintage) is still the 09-S VDB. However, the 2nd through fifth rarest are the 4 2009 bronze Lincolns. Yes, they are rarer than the 31-S. The only possible exception may be another satin coin since I cannot find their mintages.
I believe the mintages are around 740,000. I have an excel sheet that was made in 2010 (or atleast that was the last update on it) online.
On that spreadsheet, the title on those 2009 coins is "2009 Bronze", so thats the name I used. Would "2009 Satin Finish" be more appropriate?
The 2010 satins take 2nd place with 583k, 3rd place goes to the lowest mintage Memorial, the 2008's at 745k, then come the 2009's at 784k.
I think "Bronze satin finish", as other years satin finish are plated and there are 2009 bronze proofs that are not satin.
Well, they've been changing slightly since they ended sales, but not by much. Those numbers are from the 2015 Red Book. The 2009 satins are listed in the cent section, but you have to check the mint set mintages for the 2008 & 2010 numbers.
Wiki has a " Lincoln Cent Mintage Figures" page. Wiki is a great website but not 100% reliable. This is what they listed. 1936 proofs. They have 2 types. Type 1 is a satin proof. Type 2 is a polished proof. I never heard of a 1936 satin proof before. Can this be confirmed? 1944 Shell casings without tin. Im not sure if the 1944 cent should be on this list. Most, if not all planchets came from recycled materials. And the amount of tin added/not added is so small, that it has no baring on look or weight of the coin. Ultimately, despite your feelings, when zinc and/or tin is added to copper, its brass now. I feel the only reason why it was mentioned that the 1944 cents were made out of shell cases was for a patriotic influence. Thoughts?
Think of recycled metals as soup. The recipe calls for copper as the base and zinc as some flavoring. Zinc gives the copper a bit more flexibility working and it helps give the annealing process a bigger window. Without zinc, we would have alot more coins that are too hard and wont strike up as nice. So zinc is added. And when you hear "traces of tin are added", is not in the recipe. Its what is in the recycled material. It doesnt affect the planchet.......and it makes more soup !!!! Im sure some other ingredients have been added to the soup through the years without being mentioned.
Without getting into specifics, you will find several threads covering this topic with widely differing opinions. Doug claims to have seen documentation saying none was used. I found some which sort of supported that. What I can say is that there were not nearly enough shells available to make the entire year and the composition for that era remained 5% something else beside copper (tested and confirmed). That requires like a 6 parts copper to one casings to dilute the "other".