I wonder when how soon before this starts making the "strike it rich from pocket change" YouTube rounds. I guess we'll know when the "is this an aluminum cent" questions start popping up.
Plausible as an artificially struck "error," like so many other artificially struck San Francisco "errors" of that time period.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Cool error. Why not note on the slab that it is a uniface strike? I’ve seen more characters used on the label than that.
Also, it is a little misleading to call this an “aluminum cent” as this should not be considered in the same class as the experimental aluminum cents of the other mints, to which that term lends itself. No doubt, it is made out of aluminum, but struck on foreign aluminum planchet is more appropriate.
Also, it is a little misleading to call this an “aluminum cent” as this should not be considered in the same class as the experimental aluminum cents of the other mints, to which that term lends itself. No doubt, it is made out of aluminum, but struck on foreign aluminum planchet is more appropriate.
Agree. The dealer's description is a bit of hype.
Since there were "aluminum cents" that were purposely struck in 1974, the description he uses is a bit misleading, and perhaps intentionally so. This is a wrong/foreign planchet error.
@GoldenEgg said:
Cool error. Why not note on the slab that it is a uniface strike? I’ve seen more characters used on the label than that.
Agree it would be nice to say uniface on the slab.
Also, it is a little misleading to call this an “aluminum cent” as this should not be considered in the same class as the experimental aluminum cents of the other mints, to which that term lends itself. No doubt, it is made out of aluminum, but struck on foreign aluminum planchet is more appropriate.
1974 and aluminum is interesting because I don't think any of the Mints are in the same class with each other.
It seems like:
the Philadelphia coins were official
the Denver coins were done unofficially, but how did they get the planchets?
the San Francisco coins were done unofficially using existing foreign planchets.
Mint Error News calls it the "Unique 1974-S Aluminum Cent" which PCGS calls it "On Philippines 1S Planchet".
I think it's certainly a more interesting coin to think about what Mint employees were thinking about and doing with aluminum cents in 1974 especially since both the Denver and San Francisco pieces seem unofficial, though different.
I spoke to Fred Weinberg after I purchased it, and it will be re-submitted to PCGS for a new tag. Fred is adding a second line.
It will say:
Aluminum- Uniface.
Mike Byers
mikebyers.com Dealer in Major Mint Errors, Die Trials & Patterns - Author of NLG Best World Coin Book World's Greatest Mint Errors - Publisher & Editor of minterrornews.com.
The 1971 Cent that was certified by NGC AU 58 says Aluminum on the tag. It also was struck on an aluminum foreign planchet.
Mike Byers
mikebyers.com Dealer in Major Mint Errors, Die Trials & Patterns - Author of NLG Best World Coin Book World's Greatest Mint Errors - Publisher & Editor of minterrornews.com.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
PCGS and NGC do not provide population reports for mint error coins.
Once a valid PCGS serial number is provided and verified, Mint Error News Magazine will make the appropriate correction.
Mike Byers
mikebyers.com Dealer in Major Mint Errors, Die Trials & Patterns - Author of NLG Best World Coin Book World's Greatest Mint Errors - Publisher & Editor of minterrornews.com.
@RedCopper said:
Mint News Magazine is guilty of publishing FAKENEWS
I own a 1974 s Aluminum Cent
graded PR 67 by PCGS that came out of the mint in a 1974 Proof Set
Fred? Can you verify this?
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
I wish RC would post a photo of his coin in the PCGS holder – it’s possible it struck on a foreign aluminum
Planchet, and labeled as such.I don’t recall hearing of one discovered in a Proof set,but It’s possible – easiest way to clarify the last few posts would be to see a photo of the coin in the holder to see how it’s labeled so we know what we’re talking about
Retired Collector & Dealer in Major Mint Error Coins & Currency since the 1960's.Co-Author of Whitman's "100 Greatest U.S. Mint Error Coins", and the Error Coin Encyclopedia, Vols., III & IV. Retired Authenticator for Major Mint Errors for PCGS. A 49+-Year PNG Member...A full numismatist since 1972, retired in 2022
@RedCopper said:
Mint News Magazine is guilty of publishing FAKENEWS
I own a 1974 s Aluminum Cent
graded PR 67 by PCGS that came out of the mint in a 1974 Proof Set
It would fantastic to see evidence of such an error. If it does exist you have done a fantastic job of keeping it a secret.
Now, that is entirely your prerogative, but if is a secret how can anyone be blamed for not knowing it?
Fred - Yes the coin was struck on a
Nepal 2 paisa planchet. It is at least
99% the same size as a Lincoln Cent.
It is really cool .It is Also a cameo . In 1974 the US mint
Was producing coins for Nepal.
If it wasn’t struck on a foreign
Planchet it would be illegal to own.
That was why the 1974 D cent was confiscated. It was struck on stolen aluminum within the mint.
@RedCopper said:
Fred - Yes the coin was struck on a
Nepal 2 paisa planchet. It is at least
99% the same size as a Lincoln Cent.
It is really cool .It is Also a cameo . In 1974 the US mint
Was producing coins for Nepal.
If it wasn’t struck on a foreign
Planchet it would be illegal to own.
That was why the 1974 D cent was confiscated. It was struck on stolen aluminum within the mint.
Agreed.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Sorry but the coin is locked up
and I am away on vacation.
I plan to exhibit it with some of my other Lincoln Cents at the next large national coin Show. Perhaps FUN
@RedCopper said:
Sorry but the coin is locked up
and I am away on vacation.
I plan to exhibit it with some of my other Lincoln Cents at the next large national coin Show. Perhaps FUN
@JBK said:
Wasn't there a legit aluminum cent that was "legalized" and is also legal to own? The one the Congressman gave the janitor?
I believe you are correct!
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@JBK said:
Wasn't there a legit aluminum cent that was "legalized" and is also legal to own? The one the Congressman gave the janitor?
The Toven specimen is a tricky one for me because it was given to him by mistake.
Using prior case law of the mistake of selling the moon dust bag and the export license mistake of the 1933 double eagle Farouk specimen, it seems like the government official mistake of giving the specimen to Toven would be a legit release.
At the same time, I wouldn't be surprised, if the Mint tried to take action if they tried to sell and profit from the coin given their stance on unjustified enrichment. I'd imagine passing it down to heirs or donating it would be fine, e.g. to the Smithsonian, ANS, ANA. It's just that enrichment / profit may trigger action, even if it's ultimately unsuccessful.
I was in Fred's office. We did some business and he was kind enough to write a submission form to add "Aluminum - Uniface Reverse" on the PCGS insert. I just picked up the coin at the PCGS show in Vegas. They put on a wonderful show.
mikebyers.com Dealer in Major Mint Errors, Die Trials & Patterns - Author of NLG Best World Coin Book World's Greatest Mint Errors - Publisher & Editor of minterrornews.com.
@Byers said:
I was in Fred's office. We did some business and he was kind enough to write a submission form to add "Aluminum - Uniface Reverse" on the PCGS insert. I just picked up the coin at the PCGS show in Vegas. They put on a wonderful show.
Good call! I'd love to visit Fred's office some time!
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@CaptHenway said:
Plausible as an artificially struck "error," like so many other artificially struck San Francisco "errors" of that time period.
That's what I'm thinking. Somewhere, there's a 74-S indent (although dateless) that was struck through this planchet. The intent may have been for them to bond after being struck, but they didn't.
Mike Byers Mint Error News – Unique 1977 Lincoln Cent on Aluminum Planchet
This Unique 1977 Aluminum Cent is either an intentionally made Mint Error on a leftover
aluminum planchet from 1974-1975 or a pattern struck in aluminum
This unique 1977 Aluminum Cent, struck on an aluminum planchet with a weight of 1.04 grams, was discovered and certified by NGC.
There are several possibilities as to how this unique Lincoln Cent was produced. It could have been an intentionally made mint error. It could have been struck on a leftover aluminum blank from 1974-75 when the United States Mint in Philadelphia struck Aluminum Cents. Or it could be a unique and unrecorded pattern struck in aluminum. Regardless of the circumstances, this is a unique and enigmatic Lincoln Cent.
There are no authorized U.S. coins struck in aluminum for circulation. In 1977, Lincoln Cents were composed of 95% copper and 5% zinc. Since 1982, they have been composed of 97.5% zinc and 2.5% copper.
Given the following, I would have some concern about owning this:
There are several possibilities as to how this unique Lincoln Cent was produced. It could have been an intentionally made mint error. It could have been struck on a leftover aluminum blank from 1974-75 when the United States Mint in Philadelphia struck Aluminum Cents. Or it could be a unique and unrecorded pattern struck in aluminum.
It may be safer to own since the weight doesn't match the 1974 and 1974-D cents which both weigh 0.93 grams. This weighs 1.04 grams.
Paul Gilkes wrote:
PCGS's examination of the 1974-D aluminum cent during the authentication process determined it weighs 0.93 gram, the same weight as a 1974 aluminum cent certified by PCGS in 2005
One exception I would take with the article (and this is perhaps marketing), is that I personally don't feel it's greater than the 1974 issue as suggested (given the presented information) since the 1974 issue is an official, non-error, pattern issue.
As spectacular as the 1971 and 1974 aluminum cents are, they do not begin to compare to this unique 1977 aluminum cent struck at the Philadelphia Mint.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Since we're talking about something that could be an "on-purpose" or "shenanigan" (i.e., intentional error), I need to ask if there is any sign of a Japanese 1 yen undertype.
I was referring to the SF 1971 and 1974 in the previous paragraph.
I just clarified it by adding the S mint mark after 1971 and 1974.
mikebyers.com Dealer in Major Mint Errors, Die Trials & Patterns - Author of NLG Best World Coin Book World's Greatest Mint Errors - Publisher & Editor of minterrornews.com.
Comments
I’ve not heard of that one. I wonder if/when the mint will decide to be the devil and confiscate all the aluminum cents?
TurtleCat Gold Dollars
Interesting that it's only a uniface strike.
I wonder when how soon before this starts making the "strike it rich from pocket change" YouTube rounds. I guess we'll know when the "is this an aluminum cent" questions start popping up.
More likely that the counterfeit factory will start cranking up copies.
TurtleCat Gold Dollars
nice ghosting on the reverse.
That's different!!
What a coin, in a class by itself indeed! Love it.
"Jesus died for you and for me, Thank you,Jesus"!!!
--- If it should happen I die and leave this world and you want to remember me. Please only remember my opening Sig Line.Plausible as an artificially struck "error," like so many other artificially struck San Francisco "errors" of that time period.
Cool error. Why not note on the slab that it is a uniface strike? I’ve seen more characters used on the label than that.
Also, it is a little misleading to call this an “aluminum cent” as this should not be considered in the same class as the experimental aluminum cents of the other mints, to which that term lends itself. No doubt, it is made out of aluminum, but struck on foreign aluminum planchet is more appropriate.
I still like to read about this type of coin
Agree. The dealer's description is a bit of hype.
Since there were "aluminum cents" that were purposely struck in 1974, the description he uses is a bit misleading, and perhaps intentionally so. This is a wrong/foreign planchet error.
That is an interesting error.... There are some fakes out there... but some authentic ones too....Cheers, RickO
Agree it would be nice to say uniface on the slab.
1974 and aluminum is interesting because I don't think any of the Mints are in the same class with each other.
It seems like:
Mint Error News calls it the "Unique 1974-S Aluminum Cent" which PCGS calls it "On Philippines 1S Planchet".
I think it's certainly a more interesting coin to think about what Mint employees were thinking about and doing with aluminum cents in 1974 especially since both the Denver and San Francisco pieces seem unofficial, though different.
Being struck on an undersized planchet seems to negate the comparison to the trial pieces.
Just to clarify things:
I spoke to Fred Weinberg after I purchased it, and it will be re-submitted to PCGS for a new tag. Fred is adding a second line.
It will say:
Aluminum- Uniface.
Mike Byers
The 1971 Cent that was certified by NGC AU 58 says Aluminum on the tag. It also was struck on an aluminum foreign planchet.
Mike Byers
Might I suggest adding the weight as well?
Mint News Magazine is guilty of publishing FAKENEWS
I own a 1974 s Aluminum Cent
graded PR 67 by PCGS that came out of the mint in a 1974 Proof Set
PCGS and NGC do not provide population reports for mint error coins.
Once a valid PCGS serial number is provided and verified, Mint Error News Magazine will make the appropriate correction.
Mike Byers
That would be awesome to see!
Can you post it here? Is there a TrueView?
Would be awesome to see a PDS set!
Cool. I wouldn't mind owning that.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
Fred? Can you verify this?
Callling @FredWeinberg !
Just a friendly suggestion that you may wish to review the "PCGS Forum Rules and Guidelines" with regard to your signature line(s). Cheers.
Smitten with DBLCs.
I wish RC would post a photo of his coin in the PCGS holder – it’s possible it struck on a foreign aluminum
Planchet, and labeled as such.I don’t recall hearing of one discovered in a Proof set,but It’s possible – easiest way to clarify the last few posts would be to see a photo of the coin in the holder to see how it’s labeled so we know what we’re talking about
for PCGS. A 49+-Year PNG Member...A full numismatist since 1972, retired in 2022
It would fantastic to see evidence of such an error. If it does exist you have done a fantastic job of keeping it a secret.
Now, that is entirely your prerogative, but if is a secret how can anyone be blamed for not knowing it?
Fred - Yes the coin was struck on a
Nepal 2 paisa planchet. It is at least
99% the same size as a Lincoln Cent.
It is really cool .It is Also a cameo . In 1974 the US mint
Was producing coins for Nepal.
If it wasn’t struck on a foreign
Planchet it would be illegal to own.
That was why the 1974 D cent was confiscated. It was struck on stolen aluminum within the mint.
Agreed.
@RedCopper
Can't you post a photo?
(They're said to be worth a thousand words.)
Dead Cat Waltz Exonumia
"Coin collecting for outcasts..."
Sorry but the coin is locked up
and I am away on vacation.
I plan to exhibit it with some of my other Lincoln Cents at the next large national coin Show. Perhaps FUN
Quite the optimist. Good luck and take care.
I wonder how many different planchets 1974 cents come on?
I don't have an aluminum cent yet, but I do have a 1974 clad cent
Here's the photo of this coin from Coin Week:
https://coinweek.com/coins/error-coins/mike-byers-mint-error-news-unique-1974-s-aluminum-lincoln-cent-obverse-struck-on-philippine-1-sentimo-planchet/
Wasn't there a legit aluminum cent that was "legalized" and is also legal to own? The one the Congressman gave the janitor?
I believe you are correct!
Can anyone give the weight of the coin.
Thanks.
The Toven specimen is a tricky one for me because it was given to him by mistake.
Using prior case law of the mistake of selling the moon dust bag and the export license mistake of the 1933 double eagle Farouk specimen, it seems like the government official mistake of giving the specimen to Toven would be a legit release.
At the same time, I wouldn't be surprised, if the Mint tried to take action if they tried to sell and profit from the coin given their stance on unjustified enrichment. I'd imagine passing it down to heirs or donating it would be fine, e.g. to the Smithsonian, ANS, ANA. It's just that enrichment / profit may trigger action, even if it's ultimately unsuccessful.
I was in Fred's office. We did some business and he was kind enough to write a submission form to add "Aluminum - Uniface Reverse" on the PCGS insert. I just picked up the coin at the PCGS show in Vegas. They put on a wonderful show.
Here's the Philly version.
Pete
Good call! I'd love to visit Fred's office some time!
Now we need a “W.”
That's what I'm thinking. Somewhere, there's a 74-S indent (although dateless) that was struck through this planchet. The intent may have been for them to bond after being struck, but they didn't.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Cool read............
Mike Byers Mint Error News – Unique 1977 Lincoln Cent on Aluminum Planchet
This Unique 1977 Aluminum Cent is either an intentionally made Mint Error on a leftover
aluminum planchet from 1974-1975 or a pattern struck in aluminum
This unique 1977 Aluminum Cent, struck on an aluminum planchet with a weight of 1.04 grams, was discovered and certified by NGC.
There are several possibilities as to how this unique Lincoln Cent was produced. It could have been an intentionally made mint error. It could have been struck on a leftover aluminum blank from 1974-75 when the United States Mint in Philadelphia struck Aluminum Cents. Or it could be a unique and unrecorded pattern struck in aluminum. Regardless of the circumstances, this is a unique and enigmatic Lincoln Cent.
There are no authorized U.S. coins struck in aluminum for circulation. In 1977, Lincoln Cents were composed of 95% copper and 5% zinc. Since 1982, they have been composed of 97.5% zinc and 2.5% copper.
Continues in article link.......
https://coinweek.com/coins/error-coins/mike-byers-mint-error-news-unique-1977-lincoln-cent-on-aluminum-planchet/
Great link and coin! Love the discovery!
Given the following, I would have some concern about owning this:
It may be safer to own since the weight doesn't match the 1974 and 1974-D cents which both weigh 0.93 grams. This weighs 1.04 grams.
This is from PCGS:
One exception I would take with the article (and this is perhaps marketing), is that I personally don't feel it's greater than the 1974 issue as suggested (given the presented information) since the 1974 issue is an official, non-error, pattern issue.
Fascinating.
Since we're talking about something that could be an "on-purpose" or "shenanigan" (i.e., intentional error), I need to ask if there is any sign of a Japanese 1 yen undertype.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
A "W" might be possible. The West Point Mint was striking circulation cents in the 1970s but didn't add their mint mark.
I was referring to the SF 1971 and 1974 in the previous paragraph.
I just clarified it by adding the S mint mark after 1971 and 1974.