Newly Discovered 1942-S Experimental Zinc-Coated Bronze Cent???
Zoins
Posts: 34,287 ✭✭✭✭✭
MintErrorNews is reporting a 1942-S cent that looks like it was struck on a bronze foreign planchet with an (experimental?) zinc coating. It seems that this planchet and coating was done in Philadelphia, but was somehow struck by S mint dies? Could S mint dies have been used in Philadelphia or did this planchet somehow end up in San Francisco?
A lot of experiments were done during the war so this seems like it could have been part of that?
Visually, it looks pretty cool and very different from many other cents.
- New Discoveries: https://minterrornews.com/discoveries.html
- 1942-S Cent: https://minterrornews.com/discoveries-11-8-21-ngc-certifies-unique-wartime-discovery-2-5-gram-bronze-cent-struck-at-the-san-francisco-mint.html
The link has a lot of info so please click through to read. Below is a short excerpt and a few photos from the article, but there are many more!
This is a fascinating 1942-S Lincoln Cent that was struck on a 2.5 gram bronze planchet with a composition of 95% copper, 4% zinc and 1% tin. After examining this unique mint error and consulting with many experts on mint errors, patterns and die trials, the consensus is that it was struck on a 1942 Curacao cent planchet that had been coated or plated with zinc before being struck.
This lovely original lustrous mint error is choice uncirculated. There is slight weakness in the strike which is visible on the obverse in the beginning of LIBERTY and part of IN GOD, and on the reverse in the O of ONE and the AM of AMERICA. This is due to the planchet weighing 2.5 grams and not 3.11 grams which affects the strike since the die pressure was set up for planchets weighing 3.11 grams.
Planchets for the 1942 Curacao cent were produced by the U.S. Mint in Philadelphia and have the exact same specifications as this 1942-S cent; 2.5 grams in weight, a diameter of 19mm and a composition of 95% copper, 4% zinc and 1% tin. However, Curacao cents were never struck in San Francisco!
The article shows off this zinc-coated experimental cent from the Philadelphia Collection, along with some others from the collection. @MrEureka: Given this piece was done at the Mint, is there Judd number for this now?
This is also going to be an upcoming MintErrorNews cover coin!
Comments
Very cool!
Sweet! wouldn't you like to find one of these in a random bag of "Wheaties"
From the title of the thread I was expecting a post from a new member.
Not a negative nanny but am curious as to how it is determined that the zinc coating was applied at the mint and not subsequent to that with a bit of oxidation, etc. thrown in the mix to the surface.
Well, just Love coins, period.
Many pattern experts classify coating often in their determination, including NGC, the Judd authors and Roger. It is common procedure in this area by these experts.
NGC authenticated and certified the Philadelphia Collection which had many Cents and blanks that were coated and plated at the Mint.
Dave Camire and NGC authenticated and certified the 1943 Lincoln Cents and blank planchets that were either plated or coated at the Philadelphia Mint during 1942-1943 in the experiments.
He viewed this mint error raw. If it had been plated or coated after it left the Mint, post Mint damage (PMD), He would have net graded it and the NGC insert would be different.
So to specifically answer your question, which is a good one, NGC is qualified to determine whether a coin or blank was plated or coated, prior to or after being struck.
Dave Camire is the NGC mint error specialist, NGC grading finalizer, President of NCS, and a world known expert on assisting world mints in their operations.
I also carefully examined this coin’s edge and surfaces. Besides having a zinc looking band, the zinc plating or coating was obviously prior to being struck, and I have examined many patterns plated and gilt, prior to and after being struck.
Makes me wonder what all coins were there in the water jugs (old news from 2015)
https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2015/oct/29/man-makes-bank-deposit-pennies-saved-45-years/
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/u-s-coins/quarters/PCGS-2020-quarter-quest/album/247091
I collect OMS of Great Britain but on occasion these are quite difficult to separate as there many changes to the alloys in the 20th C. predecimal series, and then there were washes and other surface treatments that are very hard to detect. To be honest, the TPGs do not always get it right - experts have most definitely sided with me on this previously...
Anyway, I have not seen the coins in question and certainly would like to & with magnification. So more power to the finders of this and others...
Well, just Love coins, period.
Just a few thoughts for now.
The coin doesn't have a Judd number yet, but I wouldn't rule out the possibility of it getting one at some point. More research is probably necessary.
I don't understand why NGC didn't note that the coin is zinc-plated, if in fact it is.
It wouldn't surprise me if experimental planchets were sent to the branch mints. (Remember the aluminum 74-D Lincoln?)
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
I read the OP (not the links)...it seems the 1942S above is an off-metal error (foreign planchet) with the alloy noted on the slab, which doesn't even mention a zinc coating.
Seems to be a lot of hyperbole or conjecture mixed in with the story on some of these one off oddities.
I looked through the articles linked, and did not see any accounting of where the coin was found, or who found it. I always enjoy 'the rest of the story'. Certainly is an interesting piece. Cheers, RickO
Andy- that’s a very interesting observation about the aluminum blanks used in Denver on the 1974-D Lincoln Cents.
“It wouldn't surprise me if experimental planchets were sent to the branch mints. (Remember the aluminum 74-D Lincoln?)”
Planchets for the 1942 Curacao cent were produced by the U.S. Mint in Philadelphia, and struck there.
They have the exact same specifications as this 1942-S cent. 2.5 grams in weight, a diameter of 19mm and a composition of 95% copper, 4% zinc and 1% tin.
Curacao cents were never struck in San Francisco!
Nothing else matches this blank struck at the S.F. Mint.
Zions and Mike, Thank you for well researched and informative threads
So much to be learned here on this great coin forum.
There was a whole lot of experimentation about changing alloys because of the war needs. That is borne out by this thread alone.
I can't see that coin being struck in San Francisco for all the reasons previously mentioned.
All coinage dies were produced at Philadelphia back then. Could be that the closest die for the test happened to be a "borrowed" obverse die with an S mint mark destined for San Francisco. After all, the specimen was never meant to leave the Mint. I don't know otherwise.
Pete
Did Philly Mint supply Cents blanks to SF Mint in 1942 ? USA had entered WW2 in 1942.
Interesting question Lindy!
BuffaloIronTail-
This has happened before:
Lindy-
No S. F. Mint planchet intended for a foreign country, matches this by a mile.
The Mint Error News website has a 69 page report of coins struck by the U.S. Mint for foreign countries. It is the most comprehensive report available anywhere.
Page 9 details the coins that were struck for Curacao including the 2.5 gram bronze cent planchet (in Philadelphia).
https://minterrornews.com/foreign_coinage_production_figures.pdf
That sloppy zinc plating does not look like anything that a professional mint would have done deliberately. Much more likely that a bronze Centstukken planchet got mixed in with a batch of pure zinc Bolivian 10 Centavos planchets and accidentally partially zinc plated during some metal treatment process. It then ended up in a bin of U.S. cent planchets.
What I cannot figure out is how it was struck with S-mint dies.
Were the Bolivian 10 Centavos or any other production coins zinc plated in 1942?
Super interesting isn't it?
The Bolivian coin was just solid zinc. I would imagine that it would not have been difficult to leach some out in a chemical bath.
Other coins had zinc in a brass alloy, but none were plated.
I would not call this an experimental piece.
@CaptHenway said:
“What I cannot figure out is how it was struck with S-mint dies.”
We know that planchets have been accidentally mixed and shipped to the wrong U.S. Branch Mint. This has occured several times on Kennedy Halves and Ike Dollars.
It appears that this may be the first planchet discovered during WW2 that was accidentally shipped to an unintended branch mint.
@MrEureka said:
“ The coin doesn't have a Judd number yet, but I wouldn't rule out the possibility of it getting one at some point. More research is probably necessary”.
Andy- I am in the process of doing more research with a couple of recognized experts…
I remember when the first 1974-D 40% silver Ike came in to Collectors Clearinghouse. When I opened the package I immediately did weight and specific gravity and said wow. Within the hour I got a call from a blackjack dealer in Vegas who was all excited because he had just gotten one at his table the night before. I said "Another one?" and he said "WHAAAAAT?" He had missed being first to report it by an hour.
Anyways, there was a logical reason for those planchets having been shipped from San Francisco to Denver. When I talked to somebody from the Mint for the story I wrote about them, he told me that San Francisco routinely saved all of the reject Proof planchets that were not good enough to strike as Proofs and either struck them as business strikes in San Francisco (cents 1968-1974, nickels 1968-1970) or accumulated them in metal barrels. When they had enough barrels to fill up a semi trailer they would ship the load to Denver for striking as business strikes. Some 40% rejects got accidentally included in with the clad dollar planchets.
In 1942 there was no possible logical explanation for shipping planchets from Philadelphia to San Francisco. Railroad capacity was at a premium because of the war effort. Even passenger travel was discouraged. There were signs in train stations "Is This Trip Really Necessary?"
Without the incomplete, and possibly accidental, plating of this piece which may have happened after it left the Mint, we would normally just say that it was struck on a rolled-thin bronze planchet. Unless Brother Roger can come up with some documentation that can establish this as an experimental piece, I am going to call it a rolled-thin error.
TD
Dave Camire and NGC are more than qualified, upon examing this error raw, to determine that it was not rolled thin or plated afterwards.
If this mint error had been rolled thin, the designation on the insert would not say ‘on bronze planchet’.
If it had been plated or coated with zinc after it left the Mint, It would have been net graded ‘damaged’ (PMD).
I asked Dave specifically if the zinc coating was applied to the planchet before or after the strike, twice, and he declined to answer. They stand by the composition shown as applying to the entire coin.
A fellow expert in errors whose opinion I respect suggested to me that because of the weakness near the rim on the upper left obverse and the lower left reverse (as mentioned in the writeup) this might be a tapered thin planchet rather than a rolled thin planchet, as I had suggested. Upon further review I now think that he is right and I was wrong about the rolling. Either cause could, of course, account for the light weight.
I still have no idea what might have caused the zinc wash.
TD
Any ‘expert’ can speculate about this error, but has not seen it raw and doesn’t know how the edges are. That ‘expert’ is certainly entitled to his opinion.
Many experts, including NGC that examined it raw, disagree!
Interesting, but my understanding from the article is that the planchet exactly matches the composition and weight of the Philadelphia Curacao cent planchets. Is this the not the case?
Is this expert willing to stand behind this opinion by letting you publish his identity?
Philadelphia was doing experimental zinc washes of cents. Is this also not the case?
@Zions
You are correct! Not only does this S.F. Off-metal match the exact weight and composition of the Philadelphia produced Curacoa Cent planchet, the diameter is exactly the same as well.
In addition, it even matches the 1% Tin!
@Zions
You are correct.
The U.S. Mint in Philadelphia conducted many experiments with copper and zinc Cent planchets during 1942 and 1943, as outlined in the Mint Error News Article. These experimental blanks were plated and coated with zinc.
Zoins, I discussed the coin with TD, and am who he was citing. I have not examined the coin in person, but judging from the photos, it’s a possibility.
Other possibilities exist, and without having seen it in person, I wouldn’t presume to say conclusively what it is.
Of course the composition of this U.S. Cent matches the composition of a Curacao Censtukken, because when a foreign country wanted a bronze coin, the U.S. Mint used standard U.S. Cent bronze for it! We were the 800-pound gorilla in the foreign coin business. If some country wanted bronze coins, they took U.S. Cent bronze or took their business elsewhere! Looking at the book I have on foreign coins struck at the U.S. Mints, written by Ed Fleischmann, I count 36 different coin issues struck between 1920 and 1942 in U.S. cent bronze.
This coin matches U.S. cent bronze because it is a bronze U.S. cent. The light weight, caused by a tapered thin planchet or a rolled thin planchet or whatever, matched the weight of the Censtukken by coincidence. Coincidences happen all the time.
But this coin was struck in San Francisco.
@TD-
Ofcourse it was struck in San Francisco!
It has an ‘S’ mint mark.
Blanks have been accidentally sent to wrong Branch Mints before. This off-metal is enigmatic.
You have not seen this mint error raw, to examine the edge. You have only seen images.
NGC examined this mint error RAW and are qualified to distinguish if it’s a tapered thin planchet, a rolled thin planchet, or on a bronze planchet!
It seems to me that the only conclusion that can positively be made from the information here is that it is a 1942-S cent struck on a 2.5g planchet. NGC notes the composition, which is the normal composition for a 1942-S cent (95% copper, remainder zinc and tin; i.e., exactly the same as the Curacao Censtukken). NGC does not mention anything about a zinc plating, as they do on the other plated pieces shown in this thread. They just note “Bronze Planchet.”
Gobrecht's Engraved Mature Head Large Cent Model
https://www.instagram.com/rexrarities/?hl=en
@Rexford stated:
“ It seems to me that the only conclusion that can positively be made from the information here is that it is a 1942-S cent struck on a 2.5g planchet”.
That’s correct! That is the only conclusion so far.
The senario regarding being zinc plated or coated during the U.S. Philadelphia Mint experiments and shipped to the S.F. Mint can not be proven.
The article in Mint Error News only states as fact what NGC determined this mint error is - struck on a bronze planchet 2.5 grams.
Although there is no absolute proof that this is exactly what occurred, nor is there any documentation, the most logical explanation to describe the chain of events of this unique 1942-S cent is intriging and enigmatic. A Philadelphia Mint produced Curacao planchet was likely coated or plated when Philadelphia experimented with copper and zinc planchets and was subsequently struck in San Francisco by U.S. Cent dies.
Curious........why to save on copper and bronze metals that the US Mint would zinc plate a bronze cent when they were actively looking to entirely replace the usage of copper/bronze by 1943.
Only possible legitimate speculation is just one or a couple US Mint employees were curious about the zinc plating process and whether it worked or not. It was not difficult for such zinc plating to be implemented in the preparation of just a few of the planchets.
Again just pure speculation.
It was amazing to read this thread just the evening after I looked at my set of glass, brown plastic, and zinc plated steel cent patterns of 1942 for the first time in over a year!
Those were amazing years for experimentation, for both the Lincoln dies and Liberty/Justice dies. I'm not sure we'll ever have full documentation these given how much mint records were ordered destroyed over the years, but it's exciting to think about.
It sounds like you have an amazing collection. Those are wonderful pieces. I'd love to see them!
Do you have this one from the Roger W. Burdette Collection?
Here's one of my favorite 1942 patterns with the Lincoln dies. This discovery was posted here long ago and now has the Mike Byers Provenance.
@oreville
You have some amazing 1942 Cent experimental pieces! So much was occuring at the Mint during WW2.
@Zions said:
“Here's one of my favorite 1942 patterns with the Lincoln dies. This discovery was posted here long ago and now has the Mike Byers Provenance.”
Yes! I actually bought and sold the unique 1942 Aluminum Cent twice. It is such an exciting experimental Lincoln Cent!
Agreed (as to the 2nd half of your comment LOL)
Indeed things were wild back in mid to late 1942 as the US Mint was ordered to save on copper for the gun shells.
My interest was piqued as my grandpa received a letter from the US Mint in earlier 1942 to submit a possible experimental substitute material cent.
He showed me that letter back in 1965 then the letter was lost thereafter. That letter was signed by the lady Director of the US Mint ( I forgot her name at the moment.)
@oreville said:
“ My interest was piqued as my grandpa received a letter from the US Mint in earlier 1942 to submit a possible experimental substitute material cent.”
Very interesting!
Thanks for sharing!
My reply:
No this piece is not part of my set .... I had completed my grading set of all J-2060 brown plastic cent patterns up to 67 grade between NGC and PCGS. prior to Roger's research on the 1942 patterns. I brought all of my set for him to review and to assist in his research. He did a great job, I might add.
The only reason I wanted to complete a grading set was to study the varying degree of quality in the various experimental patterns. I gave up trying to extend the grading set to NGC MS-68 as NGC was out of control with their overgrading and fully expect NGC to eventually move up to MS-71.
@oreville
For those who may not be aware of Roger’s book:
These experiments have been outlined in Roger Burdette's book ‘United States Pattern & Experimental Pieces of WW-II’.
Test planchets in various compositions were produced, as well as many experimental surfaces such as plating and coating.
Roger’s research on experimental patterns struck in plastic, glass and other compositions is very interesting history!
Oreville- You have an amazing collection!!
These really are wonderful pieces and Roger does good work so I'm glad you were able to assist.
How many pieces do you have in your set now?
The link to your grandfather is amazing. That letter would be really interesting and important to find if it ever surfaces. Do you know how your grandfather was associated with these pieces? Did he ever submit material or was material he was working with ever used or experimented with?
That would be Nellie Tayloe Ross.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nellie_Tayloe_Ross
@Zions
That would be cool if Oreville found the letter!
Zioins: my collecting those 1942 patterns is to make up for my Mom losing my grandpa’s letter which he saved for me!
Byers: it still hurts not finding that letter!
Zoins: My grandfather was a well known Chemist operating a very successful surplus Chemical Corporation in New York City called Barclay Chemical Corporation back in 1942 and got the attention of the US Mint. No, he never responded to US Mint letter or submitted
I have not acquired more than just a couple of new pieces since 2014. This is an excerpt from the other thread in which I updated to allow you to view my set.