1947 Error Canadian 5 Cents

WOW! IRDB - nice find!

I agree with SPP-
Whatever it is on the beaver, it wasn't done
at the mint so it is not an error.
Also the indentation om the face looks like
someone tried to drill it. Also not done at the mint.

I agree with the solder theory
Looks like someone tried to make a pin out of it

Apostolic-
This is a not only a serious but probably the best coin website around, but we are not so serious that a little humour from time to time deters from the facts.

As far as wanting someone with more experience, you had one of the best error knowledgable collectors around in SPP tell you what his opinion was. He not only shares his expertise with this forum, but has written several articles for coin magazines. So I would say you can take his opinion seriously. You have to realize for a coin to be an error, it has to be done during the striking process and if you know how a coin is struck you would realize it would be impossible to be done at that time.

It doesn't matter how it was done after being struck or what the substance on the coin is, it is not an error. My guess-timate on the value is 5c.

Ok, you are new here, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Our members here are pretty knowledgable with errors, some of them who posted in this thread have Canada's best errors in their collections. So, our members see a _lot_ of damaged coins and after a while, their responses tend to be quite succinct, but reading back, they were not juvenile.

First of all, a Cud is a broken die at the rim. More than that, it is a missing piece that provides equal and opposite pressure on the opposite side of the coin. These, are examples of Cuds:

http://www.error-ref.com/cuds/

For a die break as large as you think yours is, there would be missing elements on the opposite side of the coin... there is no evidence of that with your coin.

When metal chips off the surface of the dies, it almost always happens on the highest points of the dies - the fields. These chips usually result in raised small areas and dots. For the hammer die to break of a chip the size of what you are showing, would be unprecedented, because it would have occurred in the middle of the die and inside the devices. Even collapsed dies and shattered dies do not produce a feature like that.

http://www.error-ref.com/?s=shatter
http://www.error-ref.com/die-subsidence/

Your coin does not have these features.

Hypothetically speaking, if this did happen, it would likely have happened progressively, and there would be associated die cracks - that would mean since 1947, sharp-eyed collectors from Hans Zoell to those who love varieties on Numicanada, would have seen this coin in various stages. They have not.

Therefore, your coin is not a striking error. It was damaged after it was struck.

PMD no more no less. Who ever told you it was a Cud should refrain from commenting when they have no clue.