1957-D LINCOLN CENT

duck620

half of the #9 is broken off of the date when stamped at the mint.

jonathanb

"broken off" is not an option. The minting process doesn't work that way.

It might have been struck through a filled die, so "never there in the first place" rather than "broken off"

Based on the picture, it's far more likely that this was damaged outside the mint.

coinbuf

Perhaps you can explain how a part of the numeral gets "broken off" when stamped at the mint.

PKing

@duck620 said:
half of the #9 is broken off of the date when stamped at the mint.

Cool coin duck, where did you find it?
I think what we have there is an example of a grease spot (or something else) on the die which interrupted the striking of the 9.

Can you post an image of the back of the coin?

IkesT

PKing + duck620 = PKingduck620

MsMorrisine

looks like a filled die error, but it is so minor that it is not worth anything extra

jonathanb

@MsMorrisine said:
looks like a filled die error

No, it doesn't. The OP's coin shows a clear vertical edge between the remaining part of the 9 and the removed part. It's very hard to come up with a scenario where something could fill only part of a digit in that way.

In contrast, it's hard to come up with a way that post-mint damage wouldn't create a sharp edge when removing part of a digit.

MsMorrisine

filled 9, then partial drop.

the area where the tail would be is too smooth and the color too even for it to be a scrape

however, to the person asking the question, either way it's not worth but 1 cent

Steven59

"Grease filled die"! Happened a lot in the late 1950's - running the dies long and hard....................

Typekat

@duck620
Thanks for posting those rather excellent photos of your coin.
That ‘broken 9’ filled die error on an AU wheat cent is a cool find, and a definite keeper!
No, it’s not a coin the market puts much value on - but I’m guessing you have a genuinely rare item there.

duck620

Pking here's the Rev on the 1957-D # 9 grease filled date.