Ex cathedra arguments (arguments from authority) are as invalid in numismatics as they are in science. The only thing that matters is the quality of the evidence and the logical consistency of the argument that ties that evidence together. In this case, the evidence is wanting.
Mike Diamond is an error coin writer and researcher. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those held by any organization I am a member of.
@errormaven said:
Ex cathedra arguments (arguments from authority) are as invalid in numismatics as they are in science. The only thing that matters is the quality of the evidence and the logical consistency of the argument that ties that evidence together. In this case, the evidence is wanting.
That is beside the point. It's between PCGS, GC, and the coin owner. It's a business decision.
As for science and numismatics, ex cathedral arguments exist and have their place. Otherwise, controversies would persist forever. The entire existence of PCGS is based on the value of ex cathedra opinions.
I assume you want both evolution and intelligent design taught because you can't conclusively disprove intelligent design?
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Thanks to the client who sent this through to us. We're definitely going to make sure it's correct before shipping to the winning bidder. From my fast review and checking with a couple of experts over the past few days, no one is 100% certain about this coin and what is on the holder, but it's prudent to make sure it's all correct.
This 2017 P debate was off my radar. Never opened thread until today.
Decades ago I recall USMINT stating in press release zinc core Cent planchets for proof production were double copper plated. I have no loose copper plate zinc proof cents, but I am wondering if someone has one or several can you confirm what it weighs ?
It should be 2.50 grams but maybe the Mint did not care about 2.50 gram spec for proof copper plated zinc Cents ?
Not that I think this is a proof 1c planchet, it may just shed some light on how much over 2.50 grams a double plated 1c weighs.
@Mr Lindy said:
This 2017 P debate was off my radar. Never opened thread until today.
Decades ago I recall USMINT stating in press release zinc core Cent planchets for proof production were double copper plated. I have no loose copper plate zinc proof cents, but I am wondering if someone has one or several can you confirm what it weighs ?
It should be 2.50 grams but maybe the Mint did not care about 2.50 gram spec for proof copper plated zinc Cents ?
Not that I think this is a proof 1c planchet, it may just shed some light on how much over 2.50 grams a double plated 1c weighs.
I never heard that about proof planchets but it makes perfect sense, as it would avoid the split plating issue for proof issues.
Someone should test a proof cent using the same equipment that was used here to see how it reads.
@Mr Lindy said:
This 2017 P debate was off my radar. Never opened thread until today.
Decades ago I recall USMINT stating in press release zinc core Cent planchets for proof production were double copper plated. I have no loose copper plate zinc proof cents, but I am wondering if someone has one or several can you confirm what it weighs ?
It should be 2.50 grams but maybe the Mint did not care about 2.50 gram spec for proof copper plated zinc Cents ?
Not that I think this is a proof 1c planchet, it may just shed some light on how much over 2.50 grams a double plated 1c weighs.
I never heard that about proof planchets but it makes perfect sense, as it would avoid the split plating issue for proof issues.
Someone should test a proof cent using the same equipment that was used here to see how it reads.
Or just weigh them. That weight difference seems too high for a double coat, but it is high enough to be measurable and won't require you to have an XRF handy.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Not sure if this works for error coins, but the 2017-P bronze cert (55992270) shown in the picture above comes up "Invalid Cert Number" in the PGCS Cert Verification APP
@AngryTurtle said:
Not sure if this works for error coins, but the 2017-P bronze cert (55992270) shown in the picture above comes up "Invalid Cert Number" in the PGCS Cert Verification APP
They were supposedly reevaluating it. That might not bode well for the 1983 of the same weight on the other thread.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Here are the 1989D and 1990D Lincoln Cents struck on 3.1G copper planchets!
mikebyers.com Dealer in Major Mint Errors, Die Trials & Patterns - Author of NLG Best World Coin Book World's Greatest Mint Errors - Publisher & Editor of minterrornews.com.
Can you estimate how many Zinc era copper planchet strikes in slabs exist @Byers ?
Off top of my head I would guess a dozen, but just a guess as I do not follow them & I do not think I own one ?
I am sitting on a few hundred 1982D Small Date zincs I pulled from $50 1982D Large Date Denver bags when I was a kid. I'd buy new cent bags at local downtown bank. The ones I found I immediately stapled them into 1 &1/2s , then inserted them into cowens pages and put them away 44 years ago. Came across the pages when I moved 10 years ago.
Now I am wondering, do I already own one of these ?
Thank You !
@Byers said:
Here are the 1989D and 1990D Lincoln Cents struck on 3.1G copper planchets!
@56morgan said:
I was under the impression that tin was a significant . . .
component of bronze.
In 1962 the US Mint removed the 5% tin from bronze cents due to a rise in the price of tin, replacing it with 5% zinc that actually then made it brass composition but the mint and collectors continued to call it bronze up to the conversion to zinc with a copper plating in mid 1982.
@Mr Lindy said:
Can you estimate how many Zinc era copper planchet strikes in slabs exist @Byers ?
Off top of my head I would guess a dozen, but just a guess as I do not follow them & I do not think I own one ?
I am sitting on a few hundred 1982D Small Date zincs I pulled from $50 1982D Large Date Denver bags when I was a kid. I'd buy new cent bags at local downtown bank. The ones I found I immediately stapled them into 1 &1/2s , then inserted them into cowens pages and put them away 44 years ago. Came across the pages when I moved 10 years ago.
Now I am wondering, do I already own one of these ?
Thank You !
@Byers said:
Here are the 1989D and 1990D Lincoln Cents struck on 3.1G copper planchets!
Using the strict definition of a transitional being on a planchet from the previous year, (1983 on 1982 bronze) I estimate 20.
To answer your question “how many Zinc era copper planchet strikes in slabs exist”
these (7) listed below, with later dates, need to be added.
I have handled (2) dated 1989, (1) dated 1989 double struck, (2) dated 1990 and (2) dated 1991.
Many are searching for Lincoln Cents dated 1983 and later on copper planchets, so my guess is that the known number will continually increase.
Here is Saul Teichman’s list of 1983’s on 1982 planchets, published in Mint Error News. He lists 16, but a few have been discovered that are not listed. So my estimate is 20.
mikebyers.com Dealer in Major Mint Errors, Die Trials & Patterns - Author of NLG Best World Coin Book World's Greatest Mint Errors - Publisher & Editor of minterrornews.com.
Hi Mike. I bought that GC MS65RD finest known 1983 cent maybe 18 months ago. With all the questionable coins out there in company holders these days, I think that 1983 “transitional” is still a great coin and still finest known by a wide margin?
Wondercoin.
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
@wondercoin said:
Hi Mike. I bought that GC MS65RD finest known 1983 cent maybe 18 months ago. With all the questionable coins out there in company holders these days, I think that 1983 “transitional” is still a great coin and still finest known by a wide margin?
Wondercoin.
That's a great coin--the few I've handled were not as pretty (AU or lower unc.) I've not seen one nicer than yours.
@wondercoin said:
Hi Mike. I bought that GC MS65RD finest known 1983 cent maybe 18 months ago. With all the questionable coins out there in company holders these days, I think that 1983 “transitional” is still a great coin and still finest known by a wide margin?
Wondercoin.
Yours is the finest known and a great transitional!
mikebyers.com Dealer in Major Mint Errors, Die Trials & Patterns - Author of NLG Best World Coin Book World's Greatest Mint Errors - Publisher & Editor of minterrornews.com.
Thank you Mike. And thank you for the nice write up recently on the Unique “No S” 1976 Ike Dollar in the PCGS magazine. Not to mention your regular write ups of the 1976-D 40% Silver Mint State Ike error (the finest of still only 2 examples known?) The Philly struck Unique proof silver dollar along with the Denver stuck ultra rare Mint State silver dollar error make a wonderful pair of “P/D” coins for our country’s Bicentennial!
Wondercoin.
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
@wondercoin said:
Thank you Mike. And thank you for the nice write up recently on the Unique “No S” 1976 Ike Dollar in the PCGS magazine. Not to mention your regular write ups of the 1976-D 40% Silver Mint State Ike error (the finest of still only 2 examples known?) The Philly struck Unique proof silver dollar along with the Denver stuck ultra rare Mint State silver dollar error make a wonderful pair of “P/D” coins for our country’s Bicentennial!
Wondercoin.
You are welcome!
It was an honor to be in the PCGS magazine.
And yes still the finest of 2 known.
mikebyers.com Dealer in Major Mint Errors, Die Trials & Patterns - Author of NLG Best World Coin Book World's Greatest Mint Errors - Publisher & Editor of minterrornews.com.
Comments
Ex cathedra arguments (arguments from authority) are as invalid in numismatics as they are in science. The only thing that matters is the quality of the evidence and the logical consistency of the argument that ties that evidence together. In this case, the evidence is wanting.
That is beside the point. It's between PCGS, GC, and the coin owner. It's a business decision.
As for science and numismatics, ex cathedral arguments exist and have their place. Otherwise, controversies would persist forever. The entire existence of PCGS is based on the value of ex cathedra opinions.
I assume you want both evolution and intelligent design taught because you can't conclusively disprove intelligent design?
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Thanks to the client who sent this through to us. We're definitely going to make sure it's correct before shipping to the winning bidder. From my fast review and checking with a couple of experts over the past few days, no one is 100% certain about this coin and what is on the holder, but it's prudent to make sure it's all correct.
Owner/Founder GreatCollections
GreatCollections Coin Auctions - Certified Coin Auctions Every Week - Rare Coins & Coin Values
An interesting error, any way you look at it...
.
This 2017 P debate was off my radar. Never opened thread until today.
Decades ago I recall USMINT stating in press release zinc core Cent planchets for proof production were double copper plated. I have no loose copper plate zinc proof cents, but I am wondering if someone has one or several can you confirm what it weighs ?
It should be 2.50 grams but maybe the Mint did not care about 2.50 gram spec for proof copper plated zinc Cents ?
Not that I think this is a proof 1c planchet, it may just shed some light on how much over 2.50 grams a double plated 1c weighs.
I never heard that about proof planchets but it makes perfect sense, as it would avoid the split plating issue for proof issues.
Someone should test a proof cent using the same equipment that was used here to see how it reads.
Or just weigh them. That weight difference seems too high for a double coat, but it is high enough to be measurable and won't require you to have an XRF handy.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Here is the same weight error for 1983 coin:
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1121524/1983-lincoln-cent-defective-bronze-planchet-ngc-vs-pcgs/p1?new=1
@errormaven @SullivanNumismatics
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Not sure if this works for error coins, but the 2017-P bronze cert (55992270) shown in the picture above comes up "Invalid Cert Number" in the PGCS Cert Verification APP
They were supposedly reevaluating it. That might not bode well for the 1983 of the same weight on the other thread.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Here are the 1989D and 1990D Lincoln Cents struck on 3.1G copper planchets!
Can you estimate how many Zinc era copper planchet strikes in slabs exist @Byers ?
Off top of my head I would guess a dozen, but just a guess as I do not follow them & I do not think I own one ?
I am sitting on a few hundred 1982D Small Date zincs I pulled from $50 1982D Large Date Denver bags when I was a kid. I'd buy new cent bags at local downtown bank. The ones I found I immediately stapled them into 1 &1/2s , then inserted them into cowens pages and put them away 44 years ago. Came across the pages when I moved 10 years ago.
Now I am wondering, do I already own one of these ?
Thank You !
I was under the impression that tin was a significant
component of bronze.
The 99.1% copper is a red flag as mentioned previously. A pre-transition planchet would not read that %.
The internet says a bronze cent is 95% copper, 5% tin/zinc.
In 1962 the US Mint removed the 5% tin from bronze cents due to a rise in the price of tin, replacing it with 5% zinc that actually then made it brass composition but the mint and collectors continued to call it bronze up to the conversion to zinc with a copper plating in mid 1982.
Using the strict definition of a transitional being on a planchet from the previous year, (1983 on 1982 bronze) I estimate 20.
To answer your question “how many Zinc era copper planchet strikes in slabs exist”
these (7) listed below, with later dates, need to be added.
I have handled (2) dated 1989, (1) dated 1989 double struck, (2) dated 1990 and (2) dated 1991.
Many are searching for Lincoln Cents dated 1983 and later on copper planchets, so my guess is that the known number will continually increase.
Here is Saul Teichman’s list of 1983’s on 1982 planchets, published in Mint Error News. He lists 16, but a few have been discovered that are not listed. So my estimate is 20.
https://minterrornews.com/features-1-16-26-1983-cents-on-pre-1983-copper-cent-planchets.html
Hi Mike. I bought that GC MS65RD finest known 1983 cent maybe 18 months ago. With all the questionable coins out there in company holders these days, I think that 1983 “transitional” is still a great coin and still finest known by a wide margin?
Wondercoin.
That's a great coin--the few I've handled were not as pretty (AU or lower unc.) I've not seen one nicer than yours.
Thank you Sullivan Numismatics. That means a lot coming from you guys.
Wondercoin.
Yours is the finest known and a great transitional!
Thank you Mike. And thank you for the nice write up recently on the Unique “No S” 1976 Ike Dollar in the PCGS magazine. Not to mention your regular write ups of the 1976-D 40% Silver Mint State Ike error (the finest of still only 2 examples known?) The Philly struck Unique proof silver dollar along with the Denver stuck ultra rare Mint State silver dollar error make a wonderful pair of “P/D” coins for our country’s Bicentennial!
Wondercoin.
You are welcome!
It was an honor to be in the PCGS magazine.
And yes still the finest of 2 known.