Interesting Lincoln Error - funny!
Wolf359
Posts: 7,656 ✭✭✭
My 9 year old son found this one in a pile of change. PCGS slabbed it MS65, RED, defective planchet.
Naturally, the humor of the error appeals to him.
Naturally, the humor of the error appeals to him.
0
Comments
42/92
Cameron Kiefer
42/92
kamehameha00
<< <i>Need a Hanky Mr. Lincoln? >>
His mother's name was Nancy Hanky Lincoln.
<< <i>Extreme snot rocket Lincoln.
I like it! The snot-rocket Lincoln!
( A paraphrase among Northmen )
<< <i>My 9 year old son found this one in a pile of change. PCGS slabbed it MS65, RED, defective planchet.
Naturally, the humor of the error appeals to him.
It looks much more like a "stike-through" error. If that is the case, there would be nothing wrong with the planchet. Strike-through errors are quite common on Lincoln cents. If this was a defective planchet, it would most likely be a case of a flake or "lamination" that fell off prior to plating. Lamination errors are virtually unknown among copper-plated zinc cents.
For a FREE error,I like it.
Edited to add: Part of the '6' in the date is in the crevice if you noticed.
Free Trial
If it was a lamination that flaked off after the strike he bottom surface of the area would be showing the siver color of the zinc.
If it was a lamination that flaked off before the strike the strike would have crushed it flat in the field area and Lincolns nose and the tail of the 6 would have been completely struck up.
<< <i>errormaven: Really? How would one tell for sure. Any value / curiosity difference?
Edited to add: Part of the '6' in the date is in the crevice if you noticed. >>
You'd need to take a close look to confirm that it is a strike-through error. The edges should be a bit "softer" if it was a lamination-before-plating, both due to the strike and because the plating would coat the originally sharp edge. There should be no metal flow in design elements that abut the defect if this was a strike through. In contrast, you would expect at least some slight metal flow if this was a lamination-before-plating error.
A lamination-before-plating error would also leave the coin slightly underweight. However, a defect this small might not cause the weight to fall below the expected range of variation.
Your observation of the 6 lying in the depression is a very perceptive one. This also supports a strike-through error. A design element struck through some obstructing matter won't necessarily be obliterated, but will, instead be blurry. That's what we see here.
As to value, a strike-through error this small will be worth $5 at most. A lamination-before-plating error would presumably be worth a lot more, since they're essentially unknown among copper-plated zinc cents.
<< <i>It's a strike through.
If it was a lamination that flaked off after the strike he bottom surface of the area would be showing the siver color of the zinc.
Quite correct.
If it was a lamination that flaked off before the strike the strike would have crushed it flat in the field area and Lincolns nose and the tail of the 6 would have been completely struck up. >>
Possibly, but not necessarily. It depends on the depth of the defect. One can find pre-strike lamination errors on solid alloy coins such as pre-1983 Lincoln cents and silver dimes and quarters. They're much less common than post-strike lamination errors.
Free Trial