What causes this?

Good evening all. I have tried to find some info online regarding the images I will post below but without knowing the name of the particular error ( if it’s an error at all ) I am struggling to come up with other any answers. Any help as usual will be very much appreciated

Marked penny 4 by Darren Edwards posted Jul 19, 2021 at 8:39 PM

Marked penny 3 by Darren Edwards posted Jul 19, 2021 at 8:39 PM

Marked penny 2 by Darren Edwards posted Jul 19, 2021 at 8:39 PM

Marked penny by Darren Edwards posted Jul 19, 2021 at 8:39 PM

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

If I remember it is called "pull -away" by some folks. When these coins are struck the copper clad layer is ripped away from the zinc below.

 

I've always called it a plating issue. It is technically an error but not worth anything as its so common.

 

Thank you for the reply, I will do some research on this now, so would this be classed as an error coin? Thanks again

 

Thank you, I’m going to look it up now, not worried about values I’m just happy I finally found an actual error coin while hunting lol

 

Yes, but as I said worth 1 cent.

 

I didn’t realize I had posted this in the what’s it worth section?

 

As far as I know, these are very common and NOT considered a mint error.

 

You dont have to post it in the whats it worth section for me to tell you what it's worth.

Also, if you enjoy finiding error coins, an easy one to find is on nickels on the edges of the monticello building. I have found at least half a roll of these and I don't crh a whole lot.

 

My point was that unlike many other people on here I’m not interested in the value unless I found something extremely valuable ( which is very unlikely to ever be the case ) I’m more interested in trying to learn about the coins and the reasons behind any errors if I come across them. I’m new to all of this and CRH to pass the time thank you for the advice on the nickels, will get some rolls tomorrow

 

My mistake, will keep looking until I find one. Thank you for the reply

 

Copper plating .. Not clad.

Split Plating
It's considered a Plating Anomaly

 

Thank you for letting me know, I knew it wasn’t a double die or anything like that but had no clue as to what it actually was. It wasn’t the most productive hunt today, all I found was this and a FB 1967 dime but it’s not in the best condition. The hunt will continue again tomorrow lol. Thanks again for the reply

 

First, it’s not an error. It’s a plating issue that the mint can’t or won’t resolve. Very common and in most cases it’s worse than your coin.

 

I think the proper term used is “split-plate doubling” and is addressed at Wexler under worthless doubling and also an article at error-ref.com. @paddyman98 is right.

It is a plating issue. I have seen it come and go in cycles over the life of Zincolns on different dates. The same goes with linear bubbles and gross surface bubbles. It really did take the contractors a while to smooth out the problems. The 2000 to 2008 runs had huge improvements. My own theory rests along the lines of alignment of the reverse die, and the strength of the strike on the USA area.

Now, I actually despise the copper plated zinc cent. But I still work with them for other clients, so I have to be able to tell them why the coin has no value when I find them with split copper plating…imo…Spark

 

As others have said it's called "split plate doubling". You can read about it on this site: http://www.error-ref.com/?s=split+plate+doubling

 

error-ref.com has now been saved to my bookmarks so can use that moving forwards. Thanks again everyone for the input and the help

 

Be sure to bookmark John Wexler’s site: doubleddie.com, the articles there are also vastly educational and will teach you to become a better collector…imo…Spark

 

Split plating actually is a Mint error. Granted it is common and not a desirable type, but it is a Mint error.

If its cause is something linked to either planchet preparation or along the minting process right up to ejection from the chamber, it is a Mint error.

People who don't care for mint errors consider this as a form of damage. Now, it is "damage" to a coin, but it is a Mint error nonetheless.

 

Technically you are correct. The coin is not perfect. But so are all the other things we see on the coin when it was made. I draw the line at calling the hairlines, nicks, frost breaks, weak strikes, worn dies, and marks on new coins mint errors. Get my drift?