1942 White metal Cent up for auction!

UltraHighRelief

http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1102&Lot_No=1328&type=seldom-coinnews-tem022208&ic=

A member used this coin as their first post a few months ago! Can anyone find the thread?

rgCoinGuy

Linky

And here's the thread Thread

tightbudget

Sure

Here it is

SilverEagles92

Wow, I'll be watching this one.

MrEureka

This will be interesting!

ahooka454

I remember this thread. Very cool piece. This will be very cool to watch.

amiller

I saw this in Heritage's email earlier tonight.

My question is, does anyone know the metal/alloy makeup?

Aaron

tightbudget

BTW, how many of these are known to exist?

fc

wowzer. the collector is really letting something special go...

i wonder if they will regret it!! sell everything else besides that one

:-|

MrEureka

According to the cataloger: It is interesting that the obverse shows a prominent bulge, suggesting the use of old dies that were retired from regular coinage and then pressed back into service for these experimental pieces.


This strikes me as odd. How many Lincoln Cents of any date have you seen with a "prominent bulge"? Although I am not a Lincoln cent expert, I remember none. It seems to me that this is simply not the way these dies tended to fail.

tightbudget

<< <i>I saw this in Heritage's email earlier tonight.

My question is, does anyone know the metal/alloy makeup?

Aaron >>



The metal reminds me of pewter, but I doubt that's what it's made of.

ColonialCoinUnion

<< <i>According to the cataloger: It is interesting that the obverse shows a prominent bulge, suggesting the use of old dies that were retired from regular coinage and then pressed back into service for these experimental pieces.


This strikes me as odd. How many Lincoln Cents of any date have you seen with a "prominent bulge"? Although I am not a Lincoln cent expert, I remember none. It seems to me that this is simply not the way these dies tended to fail. >>



What do you think it means?

TwoSides2aCoin

So ... um... I don't think the current bid will hold up.

speety

Is anyone else kind of sad to see this up for auction? I liked the story behind the coin and the fact that it sounded like it resided with a collector who loved the coin and didn't buy it for a 'registy' or 'top pop' like most ultra-rarities today.

Good luck to Travel in the sale. I remember TDN saying he guessed $250k, anyother guesses for the final price?

rainbowroosie

That would be one of the last coins I sold; probably well AFTER I was dead!!!!!

UltraHighRelief

I think that Mr. Simpson will be winning this one!

UltraHighRelief

i unfortunatly don't own it, nor will i ever will

speety

<< <i>i unfortunatly don't own it, nor will i ever will >>



I think he meant Travel, the original OP who just suddenly showed up with the pattern out of nowhere and has been silent since.

fc

<< <i>So is this why the original op started the thread showing this pattern to start the ball rolling on getting the interest flowing on this coin rather than putting it on the BST? >>



eh? the coin is so nice and interesting it deserved to be posted here
on the US Coin Forum.

that is not something you see everyday.. i am thankful i got to learn
of such a neat piece.

robkool

I may just have to place a bid on this one...

RWB

I'm wondering why the description omits the coin's thickness, and why the composition is simply "white metal" and not the real alloy - aluminum? The whole description lacks specific information - which makes me skeptical of the motive for auctioning the coin.

RichieURich

Whatever the story, you have to admit, it is a cool-looking coin!

Cloud in the silver lining: once this coin sells, imagine how many cents similar to this one (but not genuine) we will see on eBay!

ColonialCoinUnion

<< <i>I'm wondering why the description omits the coin's thickness, and why the composition is simply "white metal" and not the real alloy - aluminum? The whole description lacks specific information - which makes me skeptical of the motive for auctioning the coin. >>



I'm not following you. What do you think the motive is?

RWB

The description lacks sufficient knowable information to properly attribute and track the coin. Is it pure aluminum, aluminum-silver alloy, stainless steel, burnished electrolytic manganese, aluminum plated coprolite, pewter, or ??? Without weight, diameter, thickness, alloy, etc. what might be a unique piece, or one that is traceable to specific events gets lost in the mass of Judd numbers.

(My interest is also increased in that the standard references on WW-II experimental coinage are incomplete and do not adequately reflect the extent of in-house and external experiments done with both official and “nonsense” dies. Additional research is being done, but to have something that might be entirely different show up at auction, and not know what it really is, is frustrating. Suggests to me that there might be much in “quality” auction catalogs that is bogus and misleading so far as this type of esoteric material goes. – End of editorial.)

morgansforever

If we don't know the specifics of the coin, how can one authenticate it?

Could it be a monster forgery?

Does PCGS know something we don't know?

TomB

If we go by the numbers that were included in the first thread about the coin we find out that it is a standard diameter cent (1.9cm) that is 0.095 inches (0.2413cm) in height and that it weighs 1.563g. Since a cent can be thought of as a right circular cylinder we may calculate the density of the coin using the formula V=(pi)r(2)h and we obtain the following-

V=(3.1415...)(0.95cm)(0.95cm)(0.2413cm)
V=0.6842cm(3) Please note that I realize I am using too many significant figures.

We may then calculate the density-

d=(1.563g)/(0.6842cm(3))
d=2.28g-cm(-3)

This density is lower than that of pure aluminum, which has a density of 2.70g-cm(-3). Therefore, if the data is correct and the piece contains aluminum, there must be an alloy of some type. If, however, the owner of the coin gave values that were in error then this is a moot point.

TAClough

<< <i>So is this why the original op started the thread showing this pattern to start the ball rolling on getting the interest flowing on this coin rather than putting it on the BST? >>



Where is this coming from? I guess once a troll, always a troll.

speety

<< <i>If we go by the numbers that were included in the first thread about the coin we find out that it is a standard diameter cent (1.9cm) that is 0.095 inches (0.2413cm) in height and that it weighs 1.563g. Since a cent can be thought of as a right circular cylinder we may calculate the density of the coin using the formula V=(pi)r(2)h and we obtain the following-

V=(3.1415...)(0.95cm)(0.95cm)(0.2413cm)
V=0.6842cm(3) Please note that I realize I am using too many significant figures.

We may then calculate the density-

d=(1.563g)/(0.6842cm(3))
d=2.28g-cm(-3)

This density is lower than that of pure aluminum, which has a density of 2.70g-cm(-3). Therefore, if the data is correct and the piece contains aluminum, there must be an alloy of some type. If, however, the owner of the coin gave values that were in error then this is a moot point. >>



Tom, I think the height was given from the rim tip to rim tip. That would mean a right cylinder would be a little too large because the fields are lower than the rims. With the volume slightly lower, the density would be raised by a little amount making the density very close to aluminums. It looks like a pretty good match to me....

speety

<< <i>

<< <i>So is this why the original op started the thread showing this pattern to start the ball rolling on getting the interest flowing on this coin rather than putting it on the BST? >>



Where is this coming from? I guess once a troll, always a troll. >>



He has a point here, i think all 11 of travels posts are in that thread. Where has he been since that thread?

EDIT: 10 of travel's posts are in his thread. The last post is in a thread of a Barber Dime russ started.

TomB

I had noticed that, too, but without any additional information all I could do was use what was given to us.

MrEureka

This density is lower than that of pure aluminum, which has a density of 2.70g-cm(-3).

Except that you're working on the assumption that the coin is a flat circular disk. In fact, most of the surfaces are recessed from the rim, which means that the coin could be pure aluminum. Of course, as RWB suggests, the coin may also prove to be aluminum plated coprolite.

morgansforever

<< had noticed that, too, but without any additional information all I could do was use what was given to us.>>

How many of these exsist? Is there another example to compare it with?

MrEureka

<< According to the cataloger: It is interesting that the obverse shows a prominent bulge, suggesting the use of old dies that were retired from regular coinage and then pressed back into service for these experimental pieces.


This strikes me as odd. How many Lincoln Cents of any date have you seen with a "prominent bulge"? Although I am not a Lincoln cent expert, I remember none. It seems to me that this is simply not the way these dies tended to fail. >>



What do you think it means?


I'm thinking this is one more clue that the piece may be bad. Anyway, I'm looking forward to seeing it in person, and will bid aggressively if I believe the piece to be authentic.

TomB

I agree with both Andy and speety regarding my quick math on the piece, but I chose to limit myself to the data given by the owner of the piece in the first thread. Even with that limitation, I have doubts as to the accuracy of the numbers given since the owner of the piece had misplaced a decimal point in one value. Of course, we have to deal with the differential in the height of the rim vs. the height of the devices vs. the depth of the fields and have to take into consideration the described bulge. Given those limitations I thought it best to stop where I did in this case.

MrEureka

How many of these exsist? Is there another example to compare it with?

The Judd number is high R7, meaning 4-6 known. (Sounds high.) This one doesn't look anything like the others I've seen.

oreville

As an owner of the only graded (so far) bakelite 1942 pattern test US cent prototype along with the top graded PR65 tied with, I presume, Mr. Simpsonville, 1942 brown plastic pattern, I am most interested in this sale.

Yet, I agree with fc's comment:



<< <i> wowzer. the collector is really letting something special go...
i wonder if they will regret it!! sell everything else besides that one

>>

fc

for giggles i did a search on the heritage archives for the word bulge.
got a few hits but the coins that appeared are quite old compared
to this piece. so the dies made during the 1940s simply did not
fail in that manner eh? interesting tidbit of knowledge.

MrEureka

Oreville - How can one tell if a piece is made of Bakelite?

TomB

<< <i>Oreville - How can one tell if a piece is made of Bakelite? >>


Drop it and see if it cracks.

speety

**EDIT/Waiver -- After talking to TomB i have edited back in my post. These numbers are estimates at best and come from some unchecked sources, but they are the best numbers I could find and i think it's better than nothing at all. These numbers work out to estimate that lincoln cents loses 23.6 percent of their volume to the area above the coins fields and other low points as compared to the right cylinder volume.**


I liked TomB's idea of finding the density so i tried my own method. I used quite a few assuptions but feel this is a fairly accurate way of calculating the cent's volume. Since it was hinted at that this pattern may have been struck from retired from normal lincoln cent dies, i found the volume of a penny and added the volume of a right cylinder with the height being the difference between that of the pattern and of a lincoln cent.

The following values i found online, so i'm not sure exactly how accurate they are. The volume of a lincoln cent is .3486 cc and the height of a normal lincoln cent is .152 cm.
The difference in height between the pattern and average lincoln is (.2413cm - .152cm) = .089 cm (sig figs, i know...). Plug this into the right cylinder formula TomB used gives a volume of .2523 cc.

Add this to the volume of a normal lincoln cent to get the approximate volume of the pattern to be .6009 cc. Slightly less than TomB's right cylinder volume of .6842 cc.

Density is mass over volume (1.563g/.6009cc) or 2.60 g/cc. That's pretty dang clost to aluminum's density of 2.70 g/cc.

Mark

oreville

MrEureka: As a student of bakelite artifacts from the 1950's I learned to recognize them from a mile away.

This piece has that strange look that only bakelite can have.

I will show it to you at your earliest convenience (after the tax season).

I assume that PCGS also attempted to verify it as well.

BlindedByEgo

<< <i>This density is lower than that of pure aluminum, which has a density of 2.70g-cm(-3).

Except that you're working on the assumption that the coin is a flat circular disk. In fact, most of the surfaces are recessed from the rim, which means that the coin could be pure aluminum. Of course, as RWB suggests, the coin may also prove to be aluminum plated coprolite. >>



Coprolite?

Edited for intended emoticon

53BKid

How does a coin like this escape attention for all these decades.

What an incredible coin!

Musca

Doesn't the fact that it is slabbed guarantee authenticity? I thought that was the point of using the grading services- Quality assurance as well as authenticity-

Is the problem because there are so many expert numismatists on here who have never heard/seen such a coin or is there true doubt about its authenticity?

Why is PCGS not saying anything about this coin? Is there a privacy policy or what? It seems with so much hullabaloo around this coin and people indirectly questioning PCGS integrity that they would come forward and give out as much detail as they could....

Just wondering

Jason

ellewood

Exactly. That's what I want to know. Why isn't there a headline on PCGS's home page stating that this "rarity" coin has just been slabbed? Why is PCGS being closed-lipped about this discovery??????????????

What say you PCGS????????????????????????????

This is the coolest find I've seen since I've known about these boards (hands down)...BUT from all of the talk from experts here...it seems that it could go the other way as well...

TAClough

<< <i>Exactly. That's what I want to know. Why isn't there a headline on PCGS's home page stating that this "rarity" coin has just been slabbed? Why is PCGS being closed-lipped about this discovery??????????????

What say you PCGS????????????????????????????

This is the coolest find I've seen since I've known about these boards (hands down)...BUT from all of the talk from experts here...it seems that it could go the other way as well... >>



I thought PCGS was into grading coins, not marketing. I can see it now, PCGS hipes a coin and it sells for big bucks, then six more are found and PCGS is the bad guy for "over hyping" the rarity in the first place

Now if you had a 1964-D Peace Dollar and wanted to get it graded and authenticated so you send it into PCGS, would you want PCGS to be blabbing around that you just had the coin graded or that it was done so that the Secret Service shows up at PCGS with subpoena in hand for records of who submitted the coin? NOT ME I would want to keep it as low keyed as possible.

MrEureka

Doesn't the fact that it is slabbed guarantee authenticity?

Of course it guarantees authenticity, but it cannot make a fake coin real.

CaptHenway

<< <i>Sure

Here it is >>



I still say, based upon the reported weight and thickness, that it has to be primarily aluminum rather than "white metal," which to me is primarily tin.
TD

CaptHenway

<< <i>If we go by the numbers that were included in the first thread about the coin we find out that it is a standard diameter cent (1.9cm) that is 0.095 inches (0.2413cm) in height and that it weighs 1.563g. Since a cent can be thought of as a right circular cylinder we may calculate the density of the coin using the formula V=(pi)r(2)h and we obtain the following-

V=(3.1415...)(0.95cm)(0.95cm)(0.2413cm)
V=0.6842cm(3) Please note that I realize I am using too many significant figures.

We may then calculate the density-

d=(1.563g)/(0.6842cm(3))
d=2.28g-cm(-3)

This density is lower than that of pure aluminum, which has a density of 2.70g-cm(-3). Therefore, if the data is correct and the piece contains aluminum, there must be an alloy of some type. If, however, the owner of the coin gave values that were in error then this is a moot point. >>



You may be figuring the net thickness wrong, not allowing enough for the rims.
TD

Edited to add: I see that others beat me to this point.