Error Experts- What's Going On With This 1985-D Cent?

cmerlo1 · April 19, 2018 4:54PM

This coin has me confused. I see things to lead me to believe it was mint-made, but the corrosion makes me think it was in an acidic solution (at least part of it). The area with the missing plating on the reverse appears to be slightly indented and appears to have luster. What is your opinion?

ctf_error_coins · April 19, 2018 5:22PM

I am going with PMD acid treated

(Edit) see Fred's statement below .....

bolivarshagnasty · April 19, 2018 5:29PM

Acid was my first impression as well.

MsMorrisine · April 19, 2018 5:38PM

It looks like 2 things.

Is there folded over plating at 10:30 - 12:00?

1Mike1 · April 19, 2018 5:43PM

Possible plating problem.

cmerlo1 · April 19, 2018 6:02PM

I guess my question would be- if it was acid, why is the zinc on the reverse not discolored or corroded from it? I think that's why I've held off on calling it PMD, though I'm still leaning that way.

The plating does not appear to be folded over.

AUandAG · April 19, 2018 6:14PM

Looks fine to me.

bob

ricko · April 20, 2018 6:57AM

I think it is part defective planchet and part PMD.... Weak strike on Liberty lends some support to this theory... Maybe @FredWeinberg will lend his expertise on this one... Cheers, RickO

TwoSides2aCoin · April 20, 2018 7:00AM

I’m no expert but ... they will typically arrive around beer-thirty. Captain ?

MedalCollector · April 20, 2018 8:20AM

That is a defective planchet. If you look at error coins enough, it is easy to tell

Of course there has been some deterioration of the metal on this zincoln. That would be considered PMD.

Treashunt · April 20, 2018 8:34AM

Where is Fred?

FredWeinberg · April 20, 2018 9:40AM

Just walked in my office, late this morning.

From the photos, it appears to me to be a
genuine partial plated planchet, including the
obverse section from 2:00 to 6:00,

That obv. unplated section then got corroded;
hard to tell for sure if it was because that area
had something different on it (unplated section),
or if it happened after the coin was in circulation,
but I've seen enough of these partial plated zinc
cents to say that it appears to be genuine on
both sides; notice the 'corroded' surfaces on the
reverse from about 11:30 to 3:00

Because the oval zinc area on the reverse is undisturbed,
I'd say the corrosion on both sides probably occurred
at the same time as the unplated areas.

Looking at the "ERICA" area, there's a possibility
that it's damaged on that part of the coin, (scraped or ?)
and the damage caused the corrosion there, and on the
obv.

I don't recall seeing the 'corroded' dark areas on other
partially plated cents, quite like this.

ctf_error_coins · April 20, 2018 9:43AM

Yes, Fred, the unplated portion did look real to me especially with the weak strike, but ........

The corrosion is so bad, I thought maybe it pulled off the plating on a weakly struck coin.

cmerlo1 · April 20, 2018 10:26AM

@FredWeinberg said:
Just walked in my office, late this morning.

From the photos, it appears to me to be a
genuine partial plated planchet, including the
obverse section from 2:00 to 6:00,

That obv. unplated section then got corroded;
hard to tell for sure if it was because that area
had something different on it (unplated section),
or if it happened after the coin was in circulation,
but I've seen enough of these partial plated zinc
cents to say that it appears to be genuine on
both sides; notice the 'corroded' surfaces on the
reverse from about 11:30 to 3:00

Because the oval zinc area on the reverse is undisturbed,
I'd say the corrosion on both sides probably occurred
at the same time as the unplated areas.

Looking at the "ERICA" area, there's a possibility
that it's damaged on that part of the coin, (scraped or ?)
and the damage caused the corrosion there, and on the
obv.

I don't recall seeing the 'corroded' dark areas on other
partially plated cents, quite like this.

Thanks, Fred!

Error Experts- What's Going On With This 1985-D Cent?

Comments

Leave a Comment