Oldhoopster

On 5/10/2022 at 5:19 PM, EMILY BALLEW said:

Like it is a understatement, now it has become my most favorite piece. It's ok if it's marked damaged l think it's beautiful and had no plans of selling it anyway. I do plan on appraising the ones l think are valuable but l have over 500 pieces and l have lots  to learn first.  Thanks guys for showing me the ropes, l forward to many more trail and errors.  Lol

FWIW, if you have a lot of coins to evaluate, buy a current copy of A Guidebook of United States Coins (commonly called the redbook). The prices aren't the most accurate, but it should give you a good idea if a coin is common, or a better date.  It's a good $15 investment

Your coin doesn't have the appearance of a struck through cloth error.  Notice on the attached images that the weave of the cloth is still recognizable.  Your coin shows random waviness, which can be found on coins exposed to acidic solutions over a period of time. This type of random waviness can also appear on coins that were abraided with a wire brush.

In addition, your coin displays this effect on both sides.  That would mean that the planchet would have to be wrapped in cloth, or 2 pieces of cloth would have to get between the planchet and both dies in the limited space of the striking chamber, which would be incredibly unlikely

I strongly disagree with the assessment from Mr. Douglass-White.  If you really think you have something, you'll need to send it in for authentication

Note the fabric weave is still recognizable on these struck through cloth errors and compare them to your coin

Pics from Mint Error News

On 5/8/2022 at 8:06 PM, N H Ourso said:

Chk photo again I wash coin in dawn detergent for a few hours to remove dir grime an years of contaminants 

 

I give up.  You need proof that the composition is 75% copper and 25% nickel.  Additional pics with manipulated lighting isn't proof.  Weights and dimensions aren't proof, especially since they meet the specs for a cent.  Do you want us to trust your opinion and say "congrats, you found a rare error"?

Believe what you want, but until you show some XRF data or have it authenticated by a TPG, you still only have a corroded cent.

On 5/8/2022 at 6:39 PM, N H Ourso said:

NGC GRADED 1just like this number 3467:309-009 heritage auctions I’d lot 9588 June 1.2016 The coin in articles about it it’s supposed to look well worn 

The coin you referenced doesn't look anything like yours.  Take a look at the color.  Notice how it's silver like a nickel and not copper colored like yours.

I don't understand your comment about being well worn.  The coin in the auction graded Fine.  The condition of that coin has no bearing on the condition of your coin.

None of your data is convincing.  Until you have some compositional data to prove it's 75Cu/25Ni alloy, all you have is a corroded cent.

To build on what @J P Mashoke said, collectors prefer original surfaces. Polishing, abrasive cleaning, and chemical dipping remove the original surfaces and leave an unnatural appearance. That's why the collector value of such coins is heavily discounted.  

Even though the coins have strong sentimental value, please be aware the reality is that these coins will have a reduced value if they ever come to market.  What's been done to the coin can't be undone.  Sorry

On 5/8/2022 at 1:12 PM, J P Mashoke said:

That is a good looking cent. I am not sure if you will get a error on that piece. I agree it is off center but not enough for a error. That is just my opinion I am not a coin grader just a collector.

It's a 180 rotation.  

On 5/4/2022 at 11:26 PM, J.Owen said:

WHT could possibly do that though you can see the double dies and extra letters in it

Never assume you have an error because you can't explain how the damage occurred.  There are many, many ways for a coin to become damaged after it leaves the mint, but only a limited number of ways an error can be produced, and those have been researched and stufied.

Errors and varieties can always be be explained through the minting and die making process and that process would not produce a coin that looks like yours.  

Spend some time studying the following sites.

https://www.coinnews.net/2014/01/06/how-the-denver-mint-makes-dies-to-produce-coins/

Morgan dollars have been studied and die marriages identified in minute detail. With the amount of scholarship that has been poured into this series over the last 50+ years, it's almost impossible that a major die variety was missed.  You may believe you see "something", but you really need to take an objective look at it.

Look at the following site and check all of the 1884-O and S mint reverses.  If " you'se gotsta know" this will tell you

http://www.vamworld.com/wiki/Home

Also, don't forget that you're getting responses from collectors and numismatic researchers with decades of experience.  These aren't people sitting at the end of the bar with questionable opinions, these are experienced numismatists.  You can bank on a consensus response.  Or you can keep arguing that you think you see something and alienate a knowledgeable group that could help you learn and grow in the hobby (one of whom has written numerous books on numismatics).  

Your coin has a lot of damage.  Everything you see is damage related.  

The last piece is Irish Gun Money from James II

I also see an 1884-O that took a hit to the mintmark.  The US Mint used specific punches for mint marks and none even remotely resembled an S like you claim

Here is a link that shows nearly every die combination used for striking Morgan dollars.  Compare the 1884-S mm to yours and you'll easily see you have an O

http://www.vamworld.com/wiki/Home

On 4/29/2022 at 5:12 AM, Saqaratyousef said:

 

I dont think it is a cast copy ,  how I can actually be sure about it .

Details are mushy and have a soft appearance.  Pits and bubbles on the surfaces

Sorry, but it's a cast counterfeit

On 4/28/2022 at 4:20 PM, Rummy13 said:

... I think last year I overspent but not on the coins them self, on books so I could have even more knowledge.....

Just my opinion, but you can never overspend on books

Rock tumbler and very fine grit media, then a little artificial aging. 

I have never seen any clad coin or post 1960 nickel in change that would grade worse than VG.  If people are going to pay ridiculous amounts for low ball coins, somebody will find a way to supply the market.  You can't turn a VF coin into an MS, but you can turn it into a PO-01

Too much cynicism, too little time

Sometimes the prices asked on ebay baffle a lot of collectors. Even most of the uncirculated coins that look like they just left the mint are available from dealers for only a few dollars, and you're not going to find those in circulation.

The US mint made over 1.4 BILLION in Philadelphia (no mint mark) during 1944. They generally retail for a few cents each in roll quantities for coins that have circulated

If a consensus of collectors said it was post mint damage, but you disagree, would you please include the part of the minting process that you believe are responsible for the marks.  That would be very helpful.  The font and size don't look like anything used by the mint.

Filled die error (same as @Greenstang said)

On 4/23/2022 at 9:08 AM, Juanita Price said:

I have one that is exactly the same as this one.  I wish we could find out what it is.

 

 

Please read the previous posts in this thread.  An explanation has already been posted

As @Lem E said, it will grade as a details coin due to the plating, and may even be returned unslabbed.  There is no way to remove the plating without significant damage to the coin

Large date