What causes this?

Don't get nasty guys! Jim

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Jim,

Thanks for looking out for us. IMHO (which does not count of course) we are not being nasty at all, just confused because I posted that a plating (the mouse) error is not a mint error while explaining that it actually is a mint error (although not especially important). The made me do it to make my point.

The more important thing in this thread is for our acclaimed/published error expert (@JCro57) to explain the steps he goes through to authenticate these coins and what he sees in the image of the ICG coin to condemn it and then publish that it is a fake in his book.

 

Yeah, sometimes I feel like a ringmaster in a circus when the cages spring open. A
good educational exchange is always interesting and welcomed. Jim

 

@JCro57 is possibly in a different time zone (ZZzzz) or offline . I'm sure he will share his expertise will ALL OF US soon.

 

@Insider

The easiest way to authenticate a genuine unplated or partially plated cent is:

1. Genuine Mint Luster
2. No corrosion
3. Details should not be fuzzy

I have had several in-hand. Every single one on the pages of my book were in-hand.

The one in the ICG holder above lacks original luster, details are fuzzy along with significant corrosion, and you can see where the copper plating used to be before it was removed by acid.

Easy call. I am moving to St. Pete Beach when I retire and would consider joining the error authentication team.

Also, i don't see where I was tagged

 

Also, there is a difference between "fake" and "altered."

The ICG coin was altered. I believe "Fake" or "Counterfeit" means nothing about the coin is genuine. In other words, neither the planchet nor the die strikes were done by the Mint and/or their approved contractors.

For example, to me, a genuine planchet struck with fake dies is not a counterfeit in its totality. To me, it is an "altered planchet struck with fake dies." Since the planchet itself is genuine, the coin as a whole can't be counterfeit. In contrast, a planchet made in China struck with fake Lincoln cent dies is a counterfeit as a whole.

The ICG cent was deplated by a corrosive substance, most likely acid. It has corrosion, no mint luster at all, weak details (look at the super thin lettering on the reverse in particular. Can anyone really say this isn't acid corrosion?), and you can see not only pitting but traces of the copper that used to be on there. The proof is indisputable.

Thus the ICG cent is an *altered* coin, not a *counterfeit*. It was a genuine Mint product at one time, thus it can't be a counterfeit.

In my opinion, distinguishing between fake and altered is an important distinction.

~JC

 

Thank you for your response.

1. Genuine Mint Luster. This is the Best One. That's because the original mint luster of the zinc portion has yet (?) to be duplicated. IMO, virtually anyone can authenticate an unplated/part plated zinc cent for this reason.

After that, it get's EXTREMEALY difficult leaving lots of room for disagreement - sort of like toning. Much of the time, if you were not there the see it happen...
That's why folks rely on the opinion of the error experts mentioned above and others who were left out.

Zinc is a very active metal subject to corrosion. Once it becomes worn, that adds another layer of difficulty.

2. No corrosion. Genuine unplated zinc cents can corrode.
3. Details should not be fuzzy. Friction wear from circulation removes detail.

Therefore, a coin that is not 100% original often drops into the "It's my opinion" category. Modern cents are subject to chemical alteration. It is MHO that many genuine UNPLATED/PART PLATED coins have been condemned as "altered" because of that. It may also be true that altered coins may get called genuine. If this is done by a TPGS that error is covered by a guarantee.

@JCro57

I cannot find your book. Perhaps you can inform all of us where we can get a copy.

 

I'm very well-aware zinc can corrode on its own, and of course what is known as "zinc rot" (which is also covered in my book). However the ICG coin is from acid corrosion. It is a common experiment in chemistry classes, including at the school I am at. The ICG coin has all the hallmarks of acid, and not natural, corrosion.

Also, friction wear from normal handling tends to smooth out details, not cause pitting or thinning of details. Look below. This is NOT friction wear. The pitted, fuzzy appearance is from an acid, and not prolonged exposure from being buried somewhere either.

 

@JCro57

And your book?

 

I don't have any at the moment as they sold out. I ordered more and will keep you apprised. Thanks for the interest.

~JC

 

Of course they sold out. Looks like a well done job w/good images.