Advice Requested - Strange Errors...worth anything?

skippy315

Hello all...I bought these (and a few more coins) off of a retired bank VP who collected as a hobby for over 50 years. I did not see any of these on the PCGS site or in the Blue/Red book; does anyone know if they are worth anything? I will post pics (several!)

Thanks!

Kevin

Man

Just my opinion others are free to correct me.

1918 is a fake or made outside the mint.
1951-D is just a cracked die.
1955 can't tell.
1955-D "BIE" broken die error.
1959 is an off-center, about 15%.
1977 very nice off-center about 60%.
1982 I can't tell.
1983 (1) off center but how do you know it's 1983.
1983 (2) off center about 50%
1983 (3) off center but how do you know it's 1983.
1984 off center but how do you know it's 1984. (Nice looking)
1984 (2) off center but how do you know it's 1984.(Looks odd)
1984 (3) off center but how do you know it's 1984.

I say about $1-$4 for each real error.


They have a nice error coin book, I forgot the name but they have the 7th edition just released.

Aegis3

My thoughts:

1c 1918: hammer job, no value
1c 1951-D minor die chip, not much of a premium if at all
1c 1955: looks like a die crack, often called a crack skull. Interesting (I hoard 1983's w/ cracked skulls) but not too much added value, at least IMO.
1c 1955-D: minor die chip, popularly known as BIE cents. Slight premium
1c 1959: struck off-center. Has value, at least $20 and probably more, maybe even a good deal. Could be much much more. See if the latest price guide at Mint Error News (WARNING! Giant PDF File!) has any listed.
1c 1977: Off-center, probably a chain strike. Probably $5-10, though same comments as the 1959.
1c 1983 (all): all off center, I would say about $5 each, give or take, though sometimes sell for more (for who knows why.)
5c 1983-P: broadstruck, possibly an on-center, unrotated multiple strike (check edge). $5-10 if B/S, more ($25-100?) if multiple strike.
5c "1984": off-center, uniface obverse. A nice piece, uniface off center strikes where the obverse was struck through are much more rare than when it was the reverse. At a minimum $20, $50 does not sound absurd frankly. Somewhere between there.
1c 1984 (both): As the 1983 1c's.

skippy315

The only way I know about the years on the ones missing them is...the man I bought them from, who is about 75 and is like a grandpa!, found them while working in the bank (directly out of BU coins from the mint) and directly put them into the old style cardboard coin holders (with staples) and wrote the year he found them on the front. I removed them, but before doing so, took pics with his handwriting (with the year) as it is the only way to authenticate (as far as I know). They are now in mylar flips awaiting their next home... I don't know of any other way to date them.

skippy315

Forgot to mention, I also have two quarter blanks - the rims have the "quarter rim", but there is no OBV or REV. These did not have years on them, I presume 1980s as well, but don't know. Please add thoughts on their value as well (if any). Thanks.

carl

Try coppercoins.com for Lincoln Cents. As to the value of any errors they are usually a lot more than people think. At coin shows I go to that is becoming a real big thing. One dealer at shows I go to has almost all error coins and most are minimal but all sell and for a lot more than you would think.

skippy315

Thanks for the info. so far everyone...

Man/Aegis3, how do you know the 1918 is a fake? Have there never been errors from the mint that look like this? Just curious.

skippy315

...

pontiacinf

<< <i>Thanks for the info. so far everyone...

Man/Aegis3, how do you know the 1918 is a fake? Have there never been errors from the mint that look like this? Just curious. >>



its handmade, if it were struck by the die the image would not be reversed

Aegis3

<< <i>Thanks for the info. so far everyone...

Man/Aegis3, how do you know the 1918 is a fake? Have there never been errors from the mint that look like this? Just curious. >>



Ok, here's how I analyzed the 1918. Start with the obverse. We see a partial incused impression of the reverse. We also see the normal impression from the obverse interspersed in the same area. Since in a given space only one object can strike a coin at a time, this mean that the obverse and reverse impressions could not have been struck at the same time. (There are coins known as partial brockages which do show an incused impression because a coin was resting between the die and the blank, but these will not show the normal design in the area. One is shown below. Note that the obverse impression ends where the struck-through area begins.)


So perhaps the coin was struck normally once, and then struck again with a previously struck coin resting between the coin and the obverse die. The problem is we should see on the reverse, opposite this impression, the normal impression from the reverse die. Such coins do exist; a similar error (struck through a blank rather than a struck coin) is shown below. Note that you can still see the obverse die impression in the indented area, but on the reverse opposite, you also see the normal impression from the reverse die.

On your coin opposite the incused reverse impression is just a flattened area, from whatever the coin was resting on when someone hammered them together, so it is also not double struck. There are also issues with it being out-of-shape but also clearly struck in collar in the normal area.

yellowjacket

Man and Aegis3 are right on target with their assessments of your error collection.

Garrow

skippy315

AWESOME analysis! Thank you aegis3...

I was wondering how a person would accomplish this being as copper is a relatively soft metal - they must have used a harder metal to make the impression on the obverse; I don't think (though I've never tried it) that a copper coin could make that deep of an impression... Maybe a 1943 steel penny?

Anyways, thanks for the information!

Kevin

Aegis3

<< <i>AWESOME analysis! Thank you aegis3...

I was wondering how a person would accomplish this being as copper is a relatively soft metal - they must have used a harder metal to make the impression on the obverse; I don't think (though I've never tried it) that a copper coin could make that deep of an impression... Maybe a 1943 steel penny?

Anyways, thanks for the information!

Kevin >>



They could have just used any wheat cent; the other coin after all is also not going to end up looking too good after all either; you wouldn't be able to make many such hammer jobs from a single coin. And, you're welcome.

GrumpyEd

Everyone is right with these.



One other give away on that post mint hammer job 1918 is that the reverse is smashed from where the other coin was smashed into the obv. Also as mentioned the reverse on the obv being incuse is also an easy give away.

Some ways to estimate the dates are if they're zinc they're mid 82 or later, if they're zinc and have the wide AM reverse they're mid 82-92, if they're close AM reverse they're probably 93-07. There are some other changes in the portraits but that's harder to describe.

foundinrolls

<< <i>My thoughts:

1c 1918: hammer job, no value
1c 1951-D minor die chip, not much of a premium if at all
1c 1955: looks like a die crack, often called a crack skull. Interesting (I hoard 1983's w/ cracked skulls) but not too much added value, at least IMO.
1c 1955-D: minor die chip, popularly known as BIE cents. Slight premium
1c 1959: struck off-center. Has value, at least $20 and probably more, maybe even a good deal. Could be much much more. See if the latest price guide at Mint Error News (WARNING! Giant PDF File!) has any listed.
1c 1977: Off-center, probably a chain strike. Probably $5-10, though same comments as the 1959.
1c 1983 (all): all off center, I would say about $5 each, give or take, though sometimes sell for more (for who knows why.)
5c 1983-P: broadstruck, possibly an on-center, unrotated multiple strike (check edge). $5-10 if B/S, more ($25-100?) if multiple strike.
5c "1984": off-center, uniface obverse. A nice piece, uniface off center strikes where the obverse was struck through are much more rare than when it was the reverse. At a minimum $20, $50 does not sound absurd frankly. Somewhere between there.
1c 1984 (both): As the 1983 1c's. >>



I agree with this person. This is a great assessment of your coins!!