Theories And Questions On Woodie Cents.

interesting

Ha tunnioc. I was just about to say sacrifice one and cut it in half. Too funny. Although I thought about it as I was reading the post

I don't think the stripes on copper-alloy cents minted between 1978 and 1982 have anything to do with an inadequately mixed alloy. My best guess is that they're roller stains. Similar stripes occur on other denominations. See this article for a more thorough discussion:

http://www.coinworld.com/insights/d...rstood.html#

Nothing changed as far as the alloy is concerned. It's just that "woodies" like the one that heads this thread are restricted to this time period. Earlier "woodies" ARE improper alloy mix errors.

Woodies got their name originally from resembling wood on Lincoln cents. They do transcend to other denominations as well. They do not have to resemble wood, they can be in various colors. They do have to have the "lines" which can appear on one side of the coin or both sides. When on both sides, the lines match up when flipped. The improper alloy mix is just that, it was improperly mixed - or insufficiently mixed. This is why they appear on one side or two. If it appears on one side, that side of the planchet's metal was insufficiently mixed. This also explains why the lines (or streaks) can be heavy or light.
Woodies are often confused with topical substances such as stains; they are also often confused with the resulting appearance caused by various dips, such as acids. The confusion is easily alleviated on circulated coins by noting the high relief areas. The true Woody will retain it's streaks in spite of wear.
While these coins do not command the premiums of most varieties and errors, they often surpass the other types in sheer beauty. For this reason, many collectors find them a welcome addition to their collections.

Mike, I just read your article. You sir, have a fine mind. Have you considered the possibility that the narrow stripes are just less insufficiently mixed? This theory would be in harmony with stirring a can of paint. I believe it would also account for the lack of lamination errors. You are hugely more versed on the minting processes than I, so please pardon me if I'm out of line for throwing that out.

I don't believe the narrow, closely-spaced stripes reflect a poorly mixed alloy for several reasons. First, you see them in clad coins, and clad layers don't seem very prone to this sort of error. Second, the stripes appear to be quite superficial in that you can see that they're worn through on more heavily circulated specimens.

One of the biggest mysteries, at least when it comes to nickels and clad coins, is their frequent association with a gray or brown coloration. There's no reason why mint discoloration (whether from improper annealing or some other cause) should have any association with rolling marks.

I have one cent that is lightly worn and the stripes seem to disappear in the areas of wear (e.g., Lincoln's cheekbone). However, I'd like to see a more heavily worn specimen to make sure my observation holds up.