1962 D Lincoln Memorial Cent Mint Error - Split Before The Strike 1.68g

Another great find and thx for including the weight!

Almost as sweet as your 72 D split cent!

Wow, great coin!

Pretty awesome coin..

Given the fact that I have at best a Freshman education on split planchet errors, I do have a couple of questions about this coin that may be obvious to those further along in their never ending learning in our hobby.

To me the reverse looks similar to a lamination error, albeit a huge one, commonly found on wheat cents.

The obverse looks to me like a very worn, circulated coin.

So first question: Did the piece that split off of the reverse side before the strike causing the obverse to have a weaker strike?

I can see that where the strike is normal on the reverse, and see also the same areas being close to normal on the obverse. So I get that the planchet was thicker in those areas before strike. I think I get it.

Second question: Is the obverse worn from the strike event or from circulation?

Last question: Without the obvious issue on the reverse might this coin have been passed over, considered just a very circulated worn coin and tossed?

tropicalbats, Thanks for sharing your amazing finds.

Thanks so much for a wonderful comments! As for the questions. CoinHI that's an interesting observation. Probably not, but yes you see an outline of Lincoln where the strike was weak due to the depth of the obverse die in that area.

Altec12. Yes the reverse looks like a lamination, because in a lot of ways that's just what this split die is, a lamination error that didn't just peel off a bit but split the coin pretty much in half. And with the coin being so thin, there isn't enough metal to fill in all the details, so on the obverse it is very mushy (and yes, worn-looking). The reverse more clearly shows where the metal went, as the deep parts on the obverse, essentially Lincoln, fail to strike much at all as the metal tried to fill out Lincoln. While the parts of the obverse that aren't as deep, essentially the fields, show up on the reverse as the metal went thatta way. It not that the planchet was thicker in any particular spot, but more about die depth in various areas. This coin may have circulated some, but no, it is weakness of the strike you are seeing and not circulation wear.

Your last question is a matter of experience. Sure, a worn coin might look somewhat similar, but under most circumstances a weak strike on one side will show some effect on the other side so things can be figured out if you know what you're looking for. It is one of many reasons why we request full coin front and back images of coins people are asking questions about. Sometimes the answer is on the other side of the coin.

Very nice with lots of eye appeal. I love the split before strikes for the weakness they leave behind. Looks great!

-CH27

Thanks tropicalbats for the explanation of this coin. It was kind of cool reading it and understanding what the cause and affect were as written. Sometimes I think I am actually capable of understanding.
Usually after I read something describing steps or processes I go " wait, What did that say" and re-read, and re-read.