| Author |
 Replies: 11 / Views: 4,741 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
95 Posts |
Hi all, In past reading I came across this forum topic and was wondering what you would consider to be the cut on/off +/- point for 1983 copper-alloy cents. I have about a hundred 1983 pennies to go through and I don't want to make an expensive beginners mistake while hoping for beginners luck. I do have a digital scale (viper 100) if it's OK to mention the name. 1983 certified Bronze penny - https://goccf.com/t/114804&whichpage=1Is there an accepted standard for "transitional" planchet error's a +/- point for both copper and silver? I know it's probably an easy question with a quite complex answer that is different for each situation but thought I'd ask. I know some dirt etc, may slightly change the weights. Can someone help direct me to a reference that lists what US coins transitional" planchet error's I should always keep my eyes open for? I understand there are also a 1989-D Lincoln Cent Transitional Double Struck on Bronze Planchet and a 1990 the Denver Mint struck this Lincoln Cent on a pre-1983 copper Cent blank. Regards, DJ. |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3592 Posts |
A copper 1983 cent should weigh 3.1 grams or very close to that. I've never heard of the others you mention.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12437 Posts |
The only tolerance overlap I can think of would be the 40% silver clad vs. CuNi clad Kennedys, every other major business strike compositional transition will have a significant and obvious difference in weight. I have never heard of the 1989D and 1990D you mention, it is almost implausible for an old planchet to be floating around for 7-8 years before it is struck as an error. Edit: 35% silver War Nickels also have the exact same weight as the standard CuNi alloy planchets. Edited by biokemist6
10/11/2012 6:05 pm
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
95 Posts |
I hope it's ok to add the article or piece I got the information from for clarification  , I may be reading into it wrong or am confused I only copied a snippet of the original article. 1989-D Lincoln Cent Transitional Double Struck on Bronze Planchet by Mike Byers, This is a unique transitional major mint error. In 1989 the Denver Mint struck this Lincoln Cent on a pre-1983 copper Cent blank. The weight is 3.10 grams. It is a transitional since it should be on a copper-zinc blank planchet. This transitional is unique and a discovery coin. It was double struck in the collar and rotated between the strikes. This is one of the coolest mint errors I have ever handled. In 1989 the Denver Mint struck this Lincoln Cent on a pre-1983 copper Cent blank. It is a transitional since it should be on a copper-zinc blank planchet. There are three known transitionals of this type. In 1990 the Denver Mint struck this Lincoln Cent on a pre-1983 copper Cent blank. It is a transitional since it should be on a copper-zinc blank planchet. There are three known transitionals of this type. Regards, DJ. |
|
Valued Member
United States
360 Posts |
Where was this article at?
|
|
Valued Member
United States
95 Posts |
I'm not sure if it's ok with the mods to post the external link (I'm the new guy here) and don't want to step on toes but since it appears to come from a reputable source I will tell you if you google 1989-D Lincoln Cent Transitional it comes from mint error news issue 12. Moderators if adding this information outside link is wrong please forgive and let me know so I won't mistake again. Regards, DJ. |
|
Valued Member
United States
360 Posts |
It is ok as long as the link doesn't go to anything innapropriate. Also, just to be safe I only post links that have to do with my topic, so basically coin topics.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3592 Posts |
Well, the article looks real enough and they are slabbed by ANACS & ICG. What that really means is you should check every post 1982 cent for that particular error. A new discovery could be worth your while if you're looking for value.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
275 Posts |
Realisticly the chances you find a transitional planchet error in my opinion is close to nil, but not impossible depending on your
devotion and number you search. Id reccommend you check your 83s for minor DDOs, you'd probably find a few. I have a batch that I go through and I'm always pulling minors, most are class 6 and overlooked .
Anyhow to answer your quesions I have brass ones , they mostly have to do with the plating and color, they stick out . Not too much demand for them but collectable. The planchet ones you ask about you'd best find one with a coin comparitor that checks the metal composition of the cent. The copper mis planchet 89 or etc would be on the wrong side I.e the copper and not the zinc side. IT WOULD BE OBVIOUS, the date would be on a zincoln year. I've gotten so accustomed to coppers n zincs , I can literally sort a pile in minutes bye eye . You will notice in when you see it . Best to run it through again or drop check it /weigh it after the fact. I've literally searched through millions of cents one way or another. Hope this helps
Edited by Coppertop
10/12/2012 03:13 am
|
|
Valued Member
United States
95 Posts |
Hi, Just thought I'd close the loop - I did not find any transitional copper planchet errors but looking for minor DDOs.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3592 Posts |
In reality you should check every year for DDO's and DDR's even if there are non listed as discovered. A new 1988 with doubled ear was found just last year and was sold for $3K. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
To answer your question about tolerance ranges, the tolerance for the brass cents was .13 grams and for the copper plated zinc it was .1 grams So a brass 1983 cent could weigh anywhere from 2.97 grams to 3.23 grams. A copper plated zinc 1983 cent could weigh from 2.4 to 2.6 grams so there is no overlap at all between the two weight standards. Even an over weight zinc and an underweight brass would still be .4 grams apart in weight. So there would be no confusing the two.
|
| |
Replies: 11 / Views: 4,741 |
|
Posted 10/11/2012 6:03 pm
