Lincoln Memorial Cent Error?

Wow. Fascinating coin. I'll defer to the more knowledgeable among us, but I can't see a vise job leaving the raised rim we see on the obverse. I think this one got struck twice at the mint, unless someone went to the trouble of getting a negative (like a die) to vise it. It's possible that some non-coin item got hammered into it, as well. Can you get closer shots of the detail above the forehead, and around IN? I'd like to try and figure out what that circular shape through the bust and LIBERTY is.

The details on the reverse, being incuse, certainly lend weight to the vise/hammer theory.

Like Superdave, I would like to hear from a few others, but by my lights it is a garage job. The radius through Lincolns forehead is much tighter than the radius of a cent. There is no reason for this smaller circle to be there in the stamping process. This plus the incused devises on the reverse make it hard for me to think it is a real mint error.
Jim

OK, as I thought all would say. It is always a "garage" fix. But, how do you explain the edge running from the T in united to the N in one? I will post some more pics, that may even clearify some other things.

I was told my a local dealer that it was caused by ejection error. Two coins ejected at same time, one pressured against the other, one "jammed", this is not the actual terminology he used, but I can't remember EVERYTHING he said, he went into so much information about how coins are made and the process of how they are ejected, and struck etc. It was too much for me, wanted to do more research on my own so that I could understand better, went to mint site, they show a video of how coins are made, but the actual striking, ejection thing. Everything is so subjected on here, one thinks it is an error, some think it is a garage job, I am more confused, who's info do I take more serious? Don't want to come across stupid when discussing coins, don't want to spend HARD earned money on attribution services, so lost in the world of coins.

This is where alot of people get confused, all anyone on these forums can offer is an opinion that they have based on the information/pictures provided and the knowledge they have on the mints procedures of minting coins to see if they can explain anything they know about the process that may cause the error/problem. Anytime anyone can see it in person they may be able to give a better attribution of any coin in question than someone from pictures/information given

I always value opinions from members on this site, it is just so hard in todays economy to send every coin in to be looked at by the "experts". That is why this forum is important to me. I appreciate all the guess work, learned opinions, expert advise, etc from the members here. I just wished there was someone in my area who I could rely on to take my coins to. Oklahoma does not have a very strong coin collection community. I have found one coin club near me, and their meetings consisted of mainly pre 1900 coins, mostly silvers. ***Edited***

***Deliberately bypassing the bad word filter is not acceptable. The filter is there for a reason. ~ Forum Dad***

wrongalot

you said you took the coin to your local dealer ,and so far His is the only differing opinion ,,

In hand is always best ,,but not every dealer in every B+m shop is experianced with errors or for that matter knowledgeable on the minting process and every coin series which they are asked about .

I tend to agree that the coin is post mint damage based on a couple of unchangeable facts ,, the first and most important is the rim ,,the rim is on the coin before striking for the rim to be smashed by any part of the striking process is next to impossible ,, the areas in question on the obverse do not show any added design detail but just the opposite,,it shows flattened and mis shaped design details while all of the major design is in the right position and not damaged as it would had the coin been hit twice with the obverse die ,, the area on the reverse is negative(sunk into the coin) if this was caused during ejection and it was in fact stuck on top of another coin then the design should be that of the obverse of the under coin not the reverse .

put it all together and you come to a basic conclusion that the coin was altered after striking .Just exactly how it occured and what was done to it may never be fully known ,,there are so many ways to alter coins it is mind boggleing .

Metalman

Truer words were never spoken ! Your absolutely right !



Metalman