Oldhoopster

Agree, all are large dates.

I like to use the 2 in the date as my reference point.  If you look at the pics in the previous post, you can easily see the difference in the shape.  I also check the 8.  The loops are the same size on the large date while the top loop is smaller on the small date and makes it look more like a snowman.

Just be aware, the Denver Mint made over 6 BILLION cents (Both the copper and copper plated zinc types) in 1982 and only 2 copper small dates have been verified in almost 40 years.  You'll have better odds of winning the Power Ball than finding one.  Many times, those "get rich from pocket change" YouTube videos leave out a lot of important details.  

Good article on the racketeering nickel and the numismatic folklore of Josh Tatum

https://coinweek.com/us-coins/fact-or-myth-josh-tatum-and-racketeer-nickels/

2 hours ago, Quintus Arrius said:

@numisport Never occurred to me to check eBay first.  They have a whole slew of such coins they applied a colorful term to: "Racketeer nickels." I am not going to ask the obvious question: How do you differentiate an "original" "wee niggle" from those evidently created in quantity at a later time -- and perhaps,, more importantly, would they be considered damaged and rejected for certification?

I don't know of any way to differentiate between contemporary plating and modern plating.

27 minutes ago, James Zyskowski said:

Your helpless and an ignorant racist. I’m sure your very proud of your self   

I don't think @MAULEMALL is a racist.  I think he's just someone who enjoys finding people to push around on an anonymous internet chat board.  He probably was just trying to push your buttons and in an effort to be clever, he inadvertently stepped in it.  Then he tried to save his butt by doubling down with the "Some of my best friends are..." type of comment, and dug himself deeper.  At least that's how I see it.  Others may see it differently.

Time to just take his comments for what they are worth and move on

Agree that it's a struck through error (debris filled die).

1959-1991 reverses should all have the same AM

Close/Wide AM varieties did not occur until 1992.  The mint made a new CAM reverse for use starting in 1993, but some CAMs were struck in 92.  In 1994, the used the old WAM reverse for Proofs.  They mixed up a few in 1998-2000.

I found the information here.  Good site to bookmark.

http://lincolncentresource.com/wideams.html

13 minutes ago, MAULEMALL said:

So... I went to google and  typed define ski... Came up with all the skiing related blah blah... So then define Ski as a slur... Guess what... Nothing.... Zero.... Nada... Then I went through all my dealings with my polish freinds and brothers from the Corps... Polenskis ,Grkbowskies etc etc and all of them were Skis and Every one of them were cool. Ski was actually a sign of acceptance and respect.. One of my great personal heros in history John Sobieski ,Probably had someone call him Ski at one point..... But you NEED to be offended... You Look to be offended.... Why?

slur....

 

So you're saying it's ok to use an ethnic slur to make fun of other people because you don't believe it's offensive?  Even after you were told specifically it was offensive?  

I haven't been posting here for long, but if your recent responses to the board are any indication, I think I understand what you're trying to contribute.  Best of luck with your collecting endeavors.

3 minutes ago, MAULEMALL said:

Said nothing bout him, Said nothing bought his "coins" Said Nascar was real as wrasslin.. Funny thing people collect Wrasslin memorabilia...

You jumped in with some weird stuff that would make the clique proud

 

Technically, I guess you didn't specifically call him out.  I'm sure you had no intention of having some fun at the expense of another member who was just sharing his collection.  I apologize for the misunderstanding 

2 hours ago, MAULEMALL said:

Nascar, As real as wrasslin

A member posted some medallions and rounds he collects.  While this type of collectable may not be of interest to a lot of numismatists, when did it become acceptable to criticize another persons collection?

Oh wait, your post said nothing critical about his collection, you skipped that step and went immediately to personal insult.  Sorry for the misunderstanding.

1 hour ago, Callinectes said:

Thanks, The dark spot on the center is three dimensional like a piece of slag on the coin, could that be from the mint?

It looks like something got on the coin during the packaging process and the particle/substance is causing environmental damage.  Package mistakes aren't considered errors and generally reduce the value of the set.  In this case, the coin is damaged, which definitely reduces the value.

This is the money coin.  If you found it, you would know immediately

56 minutes ago, Quintus Arrius said:

@Oldhoopster - let's see now, "inappropriate humor" and now "false hope," but it was pefectly okay for that Mint Director of yore to tell that young boy years ago, in substance,, A copper 1943 cent? None were authorized. Now git kid, you botha me.

By your measure, asking a surgeon for a second (or third) opinion is being irresponsible.  I see nothing wrong with seeking additional guidance. Right now, if someone were to ask him what've you got there?  The height of folly would be to say, "I don't know. "But I've been told it's not real."

And if asked, who told you that? The last thing I would want to admit is some guy on a chat room. I wrote an evidently inattentive seller a note simply wishing to bring to his attention that the sell price he had posted on a common 🐓 was considerably less than its prevailing melt price. He thanked me profusely (for my unsolicited second opinion).

Once again, look at some authentic examples and compare it to the OPs coin.  What characteristics do you see that may indicate it warrants further research (especially after the comments of other knowledgeable members)?

I will give you credit, however. You somehow manage to work in a comment about French roosters into many of your responses.  I didn't think it was possible to do it in this thread, but you did.  Congratulations.

1 hour ago, Quintus Arrius said:

There were plenty of artifacts, coins and bars recovered from shipwrecks.  I do not recall anyone having the audacity to dismiss same with a wave of the hand saying they had never heard of such a refiner or mark, heretofore unknown, or examples of other such unknown numismatica.

Found eight inches down on a Florida beach. Silver. Aged, battered, with foreign inscriptions.  A true collector puts authencity first. There is plenty of time to determine its rarity, and Fair Market Value.

I say make multiple images and be sure to send two to David Vagi of NGC in Las Vegas who, to my knowledge, has never been stumped or vacillated over the most obscure, oldest of coins.

And other thing... how come all the naysayers here had nothing to say about the badly-worn 1837 bust half (sans counterfeit descriptor)  a seasoned member posted recently or was he given a pass because of his exalted status?  My best piece of advice is forward copies of your coin to the biggest and best emporiums and get additional opinions including price range before squandering time and money submitting something you know very little about. I wish you the best of luck!

You may want to check out Daniel Sedgwick's site and/or read his book before implying that this is anything other than a replica of a pillar and wave cob (and a poor one st that). Take the time to study the characteristics of genuine cobs and note the appearance of salvaged ones.  Does it really look like it spent hundreds of years being in saltwater and tossed around  beach?  

Did you notice the casting seam Mr. Lange pointed out in a previous post?

It's irresponsible giving a new hobbiest false hope.  

This is a link to a dealer who specializes in these coins. Take some time and compare your coin to those for sale.  You'll easily see that your coin has none of the characteristics of an authentic pillar and wave cob.

https://www.sedwickcoins.com

If you still think you have something send it in.  But IMO, you'll just be wasting $60+.  You'll have better odds buying scratch-off tickets.

On 6/23/2021 at 11:57 AM, NumisMagic said:

IDK. Doesn't appear to be post mint damage on closer inspection. I think I'll keep it until I can have it examined "in the flesh" by a pro. My favorite coins are the "rejects", the fugly ones 😆. I can relate. Their value may not be readily apparent on face value alone?! If not, that's ok too. But I TRY to go with my gut. I've learned the hard way that not listening to that "inner voice" is a big boo-boo 99.9% of the time. But thanks for all the responses. The consensus seems to agree with you so that tells me the chance I'm correct is slim. Maybe one of those 0.1% times my radar is scrambled. It happens! In the meantime I'm having a bit of fun and it's nice to have a space to communicate with people who know so much more than I do concerning "coins of the realm". 😁 Every comment is valuable in my book. XxxOoo

Just an FYI.  Some of the members responding to your thread have decades of experience in numismatics.  The are extremely knowledgeable of the minting process and have demonstrated their knowledge on coin forums over the years.  They are not " some guy at the end if the bar" giving an opinion.  

Show it to a "pro" but make sure that pro is knowledgeable of errors and varieties.  Just because somebody sells coins, doesn't mean they know about errors.

I'm sorry if your gut feel says this might be something, even with the responses you were given.  As you learn the minting process, you'll easily see that this cannot occur at the mint.  It isn't from a defective planchet, it isn't die related, it isn't a collar problem, and it isn't a filled die.  

Let us know what the "Pro" says.  Wouldn't want to be wasting  time time trying to help new collectors learn if the aren't going to believe the responses, especially in cases where it's absolutely obvious they have a damaged coin

Sorry, but it isn't an error.  It looks like your coin suffered some type of chemical exposure/damage after it left the mint.

This is what the valuable doubled die looks like.  Sorry but you don't have this one

It's a large date

Sorry, but your coin is damaged and only worth face value.  Getting single coin graded is roughly $50-$60, so you want to be sure you aren't wasting money when you send it in

11 minutes ago, Quintus Arrius said:

[The comment was specifically directed to @RWB who has demonstrated a remarkable proficiency in multi-tasking, conducting research, responding to queries and starting ones of his own.

If memory serves, he commented on the degree to which precious metals are refined and, unable to locate the applicable thread, I shoehorned it in here. (I supplied the 🐓 reference as a simple courtesy; their mintage, was limited.

RWB makes allowances for certified chiffonniers.  Right now, the only member I am truly concerned about is @Woods020.  If he skewers me, I won't have the strength to get up and brush the dust off. Oldhoopster, I am delighted to hear I was sorely missed and that hearing from me made your day!

Maybe responding to the original thread that you referenced, instead of adding this nonsense to a new, unrelated post would have been more appropriate.  Seems pretty simple to me, but then again, what do know.  

I apologize for continuing to push this thread off track.  I think @RWB has the makings for a good article/book, and I would love to read it.  With that, I'm finished posting my displeasure with others dragging this off topic (yes, I am guilty too).  

32 minutes ago, Quintus Arrius said:

@RWB  Whilst in exile, poring over scores of threads to which I was barred from commenting, I came across a reply you had made regarding precious and non-precious metals, and fineness in particular the specific details of which I no longer recall.

I thought it may interest you to know that Numiscorner, in all its ads for 🐓 as listed in its Coins of the World Catalog > France > 1901 -2001, routinely includes in its summary of detailed descriptions, a Fineness of .90000000000000002, or 9 followed by 15 zeros and 2.  (Point Nine quintillion Two?)

Sounds like somebody needs a lesson in significant figures (My freshman chemistry professor would be so disappointed)

BTW:  I was just wondering how the listing of the fineness of modern French gold coins relates to Roger's post?  If you can tie the history of early US coin collecting to 20th century French Roosters, you're much more creative than we give you credit.