| Author |
 Replies: 19 / Views: 3,236 |
|
New Member
United States
28 Posts |
I was going through some of my unsorted cents the other day, and one caught my eye. It is a 1984-D, which "looked and felt" like a bronze cent. I weighed it, and it's 2.8 grams. I was befuddled, because this is more than a zinc cent, but less than a bronze cent. After a couple of hours of web searching, I suddenly remembered that Canada progressively reduced the weight of their planchets before switching to steel, and then entirely eliminating their cent. So I revised my search parameters, and quickly found the Wikipedia page for the Canadian cent, and saw that in 1980 and 1981, they used a 2.8 gram planchet. I know that as late as 2000 the U.S. Mint was minting some of Canada's coins, so it seemed to me that this was the most likely scenario. I measured it, and my digital caliper shows 19x1.6 mm (the depth a guestimated average, as the measurement varied depending on where I measured, due to the rim's height not being perfectly consistent). These photos are NOT my best work (I was in an earlier life a professional photographer; attended Germain School of Photography in Manhattan, owned a series of brick and mortar studios). I had to use my Kodak Z1275 P&S, which has an excellent Schneider-Kreuznach lens, but, the closest I could get resulted in the coin being the size of the focus dot in the center of a traditional SLR screen. These images are SEVERELY cropped. I will be putting together a decent coin imaging rig *soon* -- I bought an adapter to mount my Micro-Nikkor on my Pentax DSLR, and a 4-leg copy stand, but I need to trim the legs to the right length for photographing coins. I am a 68 year old cripple and *everything* takes longer than it did when I was young and spry. I'll post better images as soon as I'm able. (I tried that camera first, but between the absurd amount of shake from hand-held ~1:1 macro work via ambient light, and the insane wash-out when using its strobe, I gave up, and tried the Kodak, which was able to get a decent exposure and without shake (thanks to the strobe). Sorry for being so prolix; I wanted to get the whole story down in one fell swoop.   |
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
74707 Posts |
I don't think so. I highly doubt it. Probably just an overweight Planchet.
Errers and Varietys.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
Note on the Motto. Some devices are showing zinc where the plating wore off the coin. Just an fluffy zinc cent. Maybe got a second plating? Who knows. But it is not a copper planchet coin.
|
|
New Member
 United States
28 Posts |
No, those are just specular highlights from the strobe. As I said, it's not my best work.
It's all red. If there were a speck of zinc showing, I wouldn't have wasted anyone's time (including my own!)
I may be crazy, but I'm not stupid. <g>
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
21631 Posts |
Quote:
So I revised my search parameters, and quickly found the Wikipedia page for the Canadian cent, and saw that in 1980 and 1981, they used a 2.8 gram planchet. I know that as late as 2000 the U.S. Mint was minting some of Canada's coins, so it seemed to me that this was the most likely scenario. The only time the US Mint helped out by minting was in 1968 when they minted about half of the Canadian dimes. At no time did they ever mint any Canadian cents. Edited by JimmyD
07/09/2018 4:31 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
74707 Posts |
Quote:
but I'm not stupid. Nobody ever said you were. Errers and Varietys.
|
|
New Member
United States
28 Posts |
An aside: A few decades ago, we were beyond broke. Poverty would have been a huge leap of upward mobility. We did not realize it, but we were actually fairly well off -- if only we'd known.
My now late second ex-wife came into the marriage with a literal "box of rocks." Her uncle, or grandfather, would pick up a rock everywhere he traveled (Kind of like that Lucile Ball classic *drama* (I think "The Big Trailer").
They were not small rocks.
One day, she tells me that one of them is a meteorite. She said that was what he told her, and he was certain of it, I think she said he had it verified somewhere.
So, I looked at them. Intently. Finally, I said that if one of them IS a meteorite, it's this one.
We had a store. Cameras, computers, and repairs on both. One customer was a professor from the astronomy department at the local state university. I mentioned this to him, and he scoffed (I'm being polite here). I said, well, would you be willing to look at it anyway? He said sure.
So, I brought it down to the store, and he came in and took a look at it. His demeanor underwent an instant and dramatic change. He was just about drooling on it. (This was NOT a *small* meteorite. It was a "stony" type, probably close to ten pounds.)
He pleaded with us to "donate" it to the university (to his department, of course). He said they'd even give us a nice plaque, with our names and all.
We declined his generous offer.
It was not until at least a decade after she died that I found out the value of such things.
Still kicking myself over that.
When she completed her breakdown (I did not know she had been diagnosed schizophrenic until we'd been married several years), she walked out, and married a guy apparently more her equal, and a couple of years later, she died.
I'm pretty sure that all of those "stupid old rocks" are sitting in a ditch somewhere in rural Michigan.
With that memory lingering, I am reluctant to toss *this* thing back in the pond if there's the slightest chance that it's "Meteorite 2.0" for me.
|
|
New Member
United States
28 Posts |
Quote:
"The only time the US Mint helped out by minting was in 1968 when they minted
about half of the Canadian dimes." Then how did that quarter recently discovered come to be? (IIRC it was minted a decade or two ago, and has bits of a 1942 Canadian quarter showing through on the reverse, it got a fair amount of trade press coverage.) *** Edited by Staff to add Quote tags. [quote][/quote] Please use them in the future. *** |
|
Rest in Peace
10197 Posts |
Score it with a sharp instrument. It isn't unusual for coins to be a bit off on weight. Thick rolled planchets, extra plating layer, thick core, any small factor. I've had many 2.6 and a few 2.7 ones. Remember that tolerances are only "suggestions" for the proper weight...no one is going to jail because the law got violated now if it is too light or heavy, right?  PS, can't even fire the employee if it was indeed their screw-up!  Quote:
Then how did that quarter recently discovered come to be? This was determined to be what is known as a "mint assisted error". The employee tossed a Canadian quarter in the Planchet hopper. This happens at times, is most all time INTENTIONAL! Some errors like the copper 1982D small date, was most likely unintentional, and because only one has surfaced in 35 years, was a fluke. Edited by Crazyb0
07/09/2018 4:55 pm
|
|
New Member
United States
28 Posts |
Here are some other examples of Canadian planchets used for US coins: [From http://www.coinscan.com/mintingvari...foreign.html ] Twenty-five cent struck on a planchet intended for a United States of America five cent coin. Copper Nickel - 5.00 grams - 2000 *Estimated value $750.00* Two dollars struck on a planchet intended for a United States of America one dollar coin. Copper Zinc Manganese Nickel Clad Copper - 8.07 grams - 2000 *Estimated value $5,000.00* More information on planchets produced for the United States of America by Canada Also, see http://www.coinscan.com/for/usa.html -- they made planchets for US nickels in 1999, and dollars (the manganese type, not silver) in 2000. I've read of others, but these are the first ones that popped up in a q/d web search. |
|
New Member
United States
28 Posts |
Quote:
"Score it with a sharp instrument." Seriously? Wouldn't it be more effective to put it on my drill press, or nail it to a tree and fire a round at it? <g> (I can't tell if you're joking or serious!) *** Edited by Staff to add Quote tags. [quote][/quote] Please use them in the future. *** |
|
Rest in Peace
10197 Posts |
Howard, read my previous post, you can add in to yours instead of making a new one. And, you're talking Canuck, they seem to like doing these things, they're nutzy!
The US Mint is on camera and this behavior is frowned upon, they will get their pink slip boosh-coush!
BTW, quite serious. Score along the top of device near rim, like a split plate would, will not affect any value of a stinkin zinkin.
Edited by Crazyb0
07/09/2018 5:01 pm
|
|
New Member
United States
28 Posts |
I am not wedded to the idea of it being a Canadian planchet. That just seemed to be too coincidental for comfort (their having used that exact weight a few years prior to my coin's minting,and the on-again/off-again quasi-incestuous relationship between the two nations' mints.
Other possibilities occurred to me, such as experimental planchets that were tried prior to the one they settled on in 1982.
Given their SOP (lots of experimentation), I would think it odd if they *didn't* experiment with a variety of planchets leading up to 1982 (and that's not even taking into account the 1974 aluminum coins).
And by the same token (ha ha, pun intended), I would be surprised if *every* last one of 'em was properly accounted for and destroyed prior to '82.
As to tolerances, they do indeed have tolerances, and this is way outside the tolerance range for that planchet (I don't have the numbers at the tip of my finger, but, I *did* check!)
|
|
New Member
United States
28 Posts |
I guess I'll just pack it off to NGC.
Worst case, I lose a few bucks. A drop in the bucket when weighed against all the money I've lost over close to 3/4 of a century...
|
|
New Member
United States
28 Posts |
Quote:
"will not affect any value of a stinkin zinkin." Aye, there's the rub. If I thought it was zinc, sure. But if I thought it was zinc, I wouldn't *need* to do that! Bad game theory outcome. Lose/lose proposition. If it's zinc, I lose my time (and maybe my fingertip; pretty severe spinal damage -- you haven't been able to see me repairing any cameras for quite some time now). If it's NOT zinc, I lose a nontrivial amount of money. So, I'll just send it in and let the big boys earn their keep. {To whoever has the magic, feel free to close this thread, and thanks for the convo!) *** Edited by Staff to add Quote tags. [quote][/quote] Please use them in the future. ***Edited by Howard Black
07/09/2018 5:11 pm
|
|
Moderator
 United States
34427 Posts |
@HB, first welcome to CCF. This has been an interesting thread to read, and I may have something to add, despite coming in a bit late. Specifically, could your balance be off a little? I understand that you have some high end photographic equipment, but if you are using a cheapo scale, then perhaps a little of the weight deviance is coming from your measurement tool.
"If you climb a good tree, you get a push."
-----Ghanaian proverb
"The danger we all now face is distinguishing between what is authentic and what is performed."
-----King Adz
|
| |
Replies: 19 / Views: 3,236 |
Posted 07/09/2018 3:48 pm
