Unique cent

Discussion in 'Error Coins' started by 1stSgt22, May 28, 2021.

  1. 1stSgt22

    1stSgt22 I'm just me!

    I found this cent several years ago and thought it looked really unusual! I put it in a flip and filed it away! Just found it again and decided to post it here to get some feedback/opinions!!! First thing I noticed was the last number is missing from the date! I assume this means it is a greaser! Then I noticed the mark/gouge on Lincolns back! Can't imagine how that could happen at the mint so I assume that is post mint damage! The weird part came when I looked at the reverse! A lot of the letters are completely or partially missing as well as the middle of the monument! This is also the case on the obverse but not as prevalent! Then I noticed the coin is much thinner that a normal cent, and wondered if that prevented a full complete design when the reverse was struck! Looking forward to your thoughts!!!! WIN_20210528_15_04_41_Pro.jpg WIN_20210528_15_04_54_Pro.jpg WIN_20210528_15_27_50_Pro.jpg
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. potty dollar 1878

    potty dollar 1878 Well-Known Member

    Something like a clamshell error possibly came to mind to me.
     
    PamR and 1stSgt22 like this.
  4. expat

    expat Remember you are unique, just like everyone else Supporter

    That looks incredibly thin, what does it weigh?
     
    Eric the Red and 1stSgt22 like this.
  5. Kevin Mader

    Kevin Mader Fellow Coin Enthusiast Supporter

    Looks like it could be a thin planchet error. Not enough material to fill in details/devices. Lets see what others are thinking.

    What has me wondering is the wear on the obverse. Almost acid like. But the rest looks legit to me.
     
    PamR and 1stSgt22 like this.
  6. SensibleSal66

    SensibleSal66 U.S Casual Collector / Error Collector

    No Clue , sorry / I do believe in the power of PMD here, some anyways .
     
    PamR and 1stSgt22 like this.
  7. paddyman98

    paddyman98 I'm a professional expert in specializing! Supporter

    I also say struck on Split Planchet. It was struck after the blank planchet split.
    The details on the reverse is how it usually appears when this issue occurs.
     
  8. Kevin Mader

    Kevin Mader Fellow Coin Enthusiast Supporter

    Wonder if the planchet split before coining...
     
    Eric the Red, 1stSgt22 and expat like this.
  9. Kevin Mader

    Kevin Mader Fellow Coin Enthusiast Supporter

    LOL - @paddyman98 was in the same zone!! It might speak to the irregularity on the obverse bust.
     
    1stSgt22, expat and paddyman98 like this.
  10. paddyman98

    paddyman98 I'm a professional expert in specializing! Supporter

    Here is an example from my collection..
    split e(1).JPG split f.JPG
     
  11. expat

    expat Remember you are unique, just like everyone else Supporter

    Eric the Red, 1stSgt22 and paddyman98 like this.
  12. John Burgess

    John Burgess Well-Known Member

    I'm in agreement on struck on a split planchet, however I'd still like to know the weight of it
     
    Eric the Red likes this.
  13. 1stSgt22

    1stSgt22 I'm just me!

    I'll try to weigh it today and let you know!!
     
    Eric the Red likes this.
  14. 1stSgt22

    1stSgt22 I'm just me!

    @JohnBurgess the weight is 1.6 grams!!
     
    Eric the Red and paddyman98 like this.
  15. paddyman98

    paddyman98 I'm a professional expert in specializing! Supporter

    Same weight as my example :cool:
     
  16. Collecting Nut

    Collecting Nut Borderline Hoarder

    My first thought when zi saw your original photos was the coin was struck on a planchet that was only half there. There was not enough metal to fill in the coin and that’s why it’s missing so many details.

    I didn’t read all the post but then @paddyman98 showed a split planchet coin from his collection. I believe he is correct as to what this is.

    A great error that should be graded by a TPG.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page