Multi Struck Canadian Cent

bobby131313, Again yes I understand but in order for people to be deceitful they first must have some kind of motivation, IE money, Fame without the motivation people tend to leave things alone. Since my wife is from Nova Scotia and her family is all agreeing with her on the provenance of the coin and again my wife had this in her jewelry box for 36 years I do not think she was looking for either. She told me about it after we got married 10 years ago but even then I did not see any value in it because it was Canadian and I am saying this not as a diss, but as a person who did not keep an eye on Canadian Coins or there value until I noticed 1953 Canada nickel on ebay over a week ago.

I highly doubt it would have got $5 bucks in the forties it only would have need up in a jewelry box anyway. They had no real value just a penny so again why do all the work.

I completely disagree. I pulled the $5 number out of the air, even if it was $1, still quite the profit for very little work and a 1¢ investment. Snake oil of Numismatics.

Wait, what? Copper 1943's are "opinion" now? I can take you to some site's where the Coin dealers are still split on that. According to the sites it say's even the experts are split on the validity of the 1943 copper penny. This is taken right of the US Mint site. an mind the words, (Coin experts speculate)
What's So Special About the 1943 Copper Penny?(

According to the American Numismatic Association, the 1943 copper-alloy cent is one of the most idealized and potentially one of the most sought-after items in American numismatics. Nearly all circulating pennies at that time were struck in zinc-coated steel because copper and nickel were needed for the Allied war effort.

Approximately 40 1943 copper-alloy cents are known to remain in existence.
40 1943 copper-alloy cents are known to remain in existence. Coin experts speculate that they were struck by accident when copper-alloy 1-cent blanks remained in the press hopper when production began on the new steel pennies.

A 1943 copper cent was first offered for sale in 1958, bringing more than $40,000. A subsequent piece sold for $10,000 at an ANA convention in 1981. The highest amount paid for a 1943 copper cent was $82,500 in 1996.

Because of its collector value, the 1943 copper cent has been counterfeited by coating steel cents with copper or by altering the dates of 1945, 1948, and 1949 pennies.

The easiest way to determine if a 1943 cent is made of steel, and not copper, is to use a magnet. If it sticks to the magnet, it is not copper. If it does not stick, the coin might be of copper and should be authenticated by an expert.

To find out about coin experts in your area, you may call the American Numismatic Association at (719) 632-2646.

Whatever website you read that from is either just plain wrong or you are drastically misinterpreting what you read. NO ONE with any gravitas in the numismatic community thinks the 1943 coppers and 1944 steels are some fabrication instead of legitimate off-metal errors. It is simply a matter of a few of the previous year's planchets being left in the planchet bins and then getting run with the new planchets, it is not any more complicated than that.

It happens almost every time there is a composition change- 90% silver coins are known with 1965 dates, 40% silver halves exist for 1971 and 1977, and there are also a few 1983 copper cents floating around.

Very interesting thread.

In the interest of clarity - since my own personal opinion is so far the other way that it's easy for me to be considered biased (because I am ) - there is a non-zero chance that this was, in fact, created on Mint property. It would require careful, deliberate work and a fair amount of press time, but it is in the realm of possibility as long as you make the (large) mental leap of assuming a Mint worker had access to both 1943 and 1944 dies simultaneously.

And, frankly, in order to be objective here I'm having to ignore the blatant time anomaly that travel back to 1941 would have to be the very_last_thing which happened to the coin....

The line in the sand for me is, I cannot envision a scenario in which this happens at the Mint accidentally. The other side of that line is an area where moral judgment comes into play somewhat, as does pure subjectivity about the legitimacy of employee-created "errors." I am remiss in offering any values-based opinions there, if I have.

All the same, purely logical evaluation shows the overwhelming preponderance of the evidence pointing towards a postmint event being responsible here.

The only anomaly in the whole picture is that this is a Canadian coin - such whimsical "errors" are so common with Lincoln Cents that they're early learning material for aspiring Lincoln collectors. The mechanism of creation is usually known or easily inferred, and their commonality - Texas Cents, vise jobs, the like - makes them the logical choice as an explanation simply because the sole Mint possibility is so outlandishly unlikely.