Sandon

See https://www.error-ref.com/?s=plating+blisters for an explanation of the cause of plating blisters on copper plated zinc cents.

It is copper (95% copper, 5% zinc) as indicated by its weight, assuming that the scale is accurate. The problem is that it is a Large Date. Of all the varieties of 1982 cents only the 1982-D Small Date copper, which was not intentionally coined, and of which only two have been found, is valuable. Most of the over 6 billion 1982-D cents minted are of the Large Date, copper variety, and the OP's circulated example does not exhibit an error of any type and has no collector value. The OP has nevertheless asked this same question on the Ask NGC/NCS forum and received the stock answer to the effect that if he wants the coin evaluated he must submit it and pay the fees and other costs. To the OP--Please study the following graphic, which will confirm that your coin is a common Large Date: Note particularly the differences in distance of the "2" to the rim and that the upper loop of the "8" on your coin is nearly as large as the lower loop. If you still want to spend a great deal of money to have a coin worth face value encapsulated in a grading service holder, that is your choice. The money you would save would be better spent on books and subscriptions that would enable you to evaluate coins yourself, including those (some free) identified on the following forum topics:

The term "cleaning" refers to nearly any chemical or abrasive process that affects the surface of a coin, even wiping the coin with a cloth. Today's collectors regard "cleaning" as an impairment that makes the coin less desirable and, therefore, less valuable. Coins can be "conserved" using solvents such as acetone that remove surface dirt without affecting the coin's surface and purportedly with processes used by experts. A circulated, damaged 1984 cent is worth only face value whether it has been "cleaned" or not.

As you can see, the NGC staff will not answer questions of this sort but will simply reply with a stock answer telling you to submit the coin, which will likely cause you to waste a great deal of money. The photos of your coin do not suggest that it has a mirror proof surface. It appears to have normal frosty luster, an ordinary strike and a beveled edge, as opposed to the mirror fields, very sharp strike and squarer edge of the Chapman proof Remember that Chapman proofs, of which ten to fifteen are thought to have been made, though possibly a few more, as opposed to 44,690,000 regular 1921 Morgan dollars, were sold to numismatists of that era and are highly unlikely to simply "turn up" among ordinary coins. See https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1921-1-chapman/7342. There is a tentative attribution guide to these coins at http://ec2-13-58-222-16.us-east-2.compute.amazonaws.com/wiki/1921-P_PROOF to which I would compare your coin before entertaining any notion of submitting it to a grading service. I would also try to show it to one or more numismatists who are familiar with authenticated examples.

1936-D Cincinnati Music Center commemorative (5,005 minted), PCGS graded MS 65. This may have been an early strike, as the coin exhibits numerous die polish marks, especially on the obverse:

1821 Small Date Capped Bust dime, PCGS graded F 12, very original in appearance and accompanied by an old Stack's envelope from a 1959 auction sale: Photos of the coin courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. I don't see doubling of any type in your photos. (What letters or other design elements do you think are doubled?) I do see a shiny substance covering much of the reverse that could be tape or glue residue and might be removed by soaking the coin in acetone. P.S. A doubled die is classified as a die variety, not a mint error. See Variety vs. Mint Error | NGC (ngccoin.com).

Your photos should be cropped as follows to just show the coin, not the holder and surrounding surface. The resolution would be better if the original photos had been taken closer and with the camera directly overhead. Your coin has an oval "O" of the style used on most New Orleans mint Morgan dollars from 1879-1884. A rounder "O" appears on a sizeable minority of 1884-Os and the vast majority of New Orleans mint Morgan dollars from 1885-1904. The oval "O" only reappears on a small minority of coins dated 1888 and 1889. (A "micro O" appears on many 1880-Os and a minority of 1899-Os). It is not unusual for the oval "O" to be at least partly filled, especially on coins dated 1884. While this could be due to die chips or foreign matter in the die, it may also be due to the mint mark punch wearing out, which could be an explanation for the rounder "O" punch being introduced in 1884. It is also not unusual for some of the leaves and other features on Morgan dollars of high mintage issues such as the 1884-O to have been partly polished out of the die. The dies may have been repolished to remove evidence of die clashes or other damage during production. The VAM world Morgan dollar die variety site lists numerous (numerical) varieties and several (alphabetical) die states for 1884-Os, though none is described in the catalog specifically by a filled "O" or overpolished leaves. http://www.vamworld.com/wiki/1884-O_VAMs. You may be able to determine the VAM variety of your coin by going through the specific descriptions and photos of the various varieties, but it does not appear to be one of the more sought-after varieties, which are usually referred to as the "Top 100", "Hot 50", or "Hit List 40".

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Notwithstanding the blurry and uncropped photos, I think that your SBA dollar is a 1979-S, of which over 109.5 million were struck for circulation. It's nothing special and is worth face value as a circulated coin. The "S" die punch had been in use for many years, and the mintmark often resembles a blob. It was replaced with a clearer "S" for some proof coins of 1979 and for all "S" mint coins in 1980. In the future, please try to provide better focused photos and crop them so that they show as little of the surface surrounding the coin as possible.

There is a 1989-D cent certified by PCGS as having been struck on a pre-1983 planchet and graded MS 65 RD that was sold by Heritage for $7,500 in 2018. https://www.pcgs.com/cert/10759563. Photos of this coin indicate that it has smooth surfaces without blisters, unlike the OP's 1989. See https://coins.ha.com/itm/a/1271-4767.s I highly doubt that (1) there would have been a leftover pre-1983 brass planchet that happened to still be lingering in a bin at the Denver mint in 1989 and was then struck and (2) that someone who inspected and weighed every coin that came into his or her possession would have happened to find it, in uncirculated condition, no less. I strongly suspect misconduct by mint personnel.

1845 Liberty Seated half dollar, PCGS graded XF 45:

This 1956-D cent is just severely corroded. Copper is a chemically active metal and will develop this roughness and pitting including the deep cavities on this coin from being buried in the ground, especially in a damp environment, or from exposure to other unfavorable environments or substances. Despite their difference in age, this cent's surfaces resemble those on this "filler" 1794 (Head of 1793) large cent, also likely a "ground find": Photos courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries.

The information in your last post, which I assume is from PCGS Coinfacts, a legitimate source, is correct. The "seven varieties" don't include the extremely rare 1982-D small date copper because it wasn't intentionally made by the mint and is usually classified as a mint error.

Each mint error is unique, so it can be difficult to value any particular example. A generic "defective die" error on a copper plated zinc Lincoln cent lists $15 in the 2023 "Red Book." Sullivan Numismatics, a major error dealer and contributor to the error-ref.com site, might be able to give you an idea of your coin's value or make an offer for it if you want to sell it. See https://sullivannumismatics.com/contact-us/.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. As the NGC Registry forum is intended for topics pertaining to the certified coin registry, your topic would get better attention on the "Newbie Coin Collecting Questions" forum. (The Administrator will likely move it there.) While we would need cropped, clear photos of each side of each of your coins to evaluate them, the answer to your question is almost certainly that none of these coins would be worth the substantial cost of submission to a third-party grading service, which is what I assume you mean by "worth grading". However, any coin that you want to collect is worth grading by you, once you have learned how. Before you even think about submitting coins to grading services, it is essential that you have a good understanding of how to grade and otherwise evaluate coins yourself. Many coins that are of insufficient value to justify third-party grading and encapsulation (at least several hundred dollars, in my opinion) may be enjoyably collected in coin albums or other appropriate holders. Very inexpensive ones may even be kept in cardboard 2x2 holders like yours, although there is the risk of scratches by the staples or the thin plastic cover tearing and exposing the coin to the environment. Please refer to the following forum topics that identify reliable print and online resources from which you may learn about how to evaluate and collect U.S. coins:

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Just click the link that the Administrator provided and provide the information requested at the bottom of the page at "Reply to This Topic". You would need examples of pertinent NGC certified coins of these types to provide the requested certification numbers. I assume that these are modern coins, not ancients, as there are no competitive sets for ancient coins.

The coins that you are posted are small dates, but, yes, the 1982 is common regardless of its composition, and the 1982-Ds are common if they are copper plated zinc, as they almost certainly are.

Respectfully, your worn and badly scratched 1976-D Bicentennial quarter is only worth its face value of 25 cents. Even almost all uncirculated examples of this issue wouldn't be worth the cost of submission to a third-party grading service, which is what I assume what you mean by "having it graded". Before you even think about submitting coins to grading services, it is essential that you have a good understanding of how to grade and otherwise evaluate coins yourself. Many coins that are of insufficient value to justify third-party grading and encapsulation may be enjoyably collected in coin albums or other appropriate holders. Please refer to the following forum topics that identify reliable print and online resources from which you may learn about how to evaluate and collect U.S. coins:

No, unless it had been struck on a leftover 95% copper, 5% zinc blank, which would weigh approximately 3.11 grams and likely have to pass other tests for authentication. Only two have been found. 1982-D small dates struck from the new copper plated zinc alloy (approximately 2.5 grams), like all other varieties of 1982 and 1982-D cents are extremely common and would only be worth face value in any condition that you could expect to find them in circulation. Yes. Based upon the quotation you are showing, the website you are looking at is apparently spreading false information. Over 10.7 billion 1982 (no mintmark) cents were made, all of whose four varieties (all possible combinations of large and small dates and the old 95% copper and new copper plated zinc alloys) are common. The majority of the mintage was of the old alloy, whose standard weight of 3.11 grams would be the same for all cents going back to 1865, except for 1943 steel cents. Please use accepted resources such as those I referred you to in one of your earlier topics and not random websites, some of which contain false or incomplete information. Have you at least obtained a "Red Book"? The 2025 edition is now available from its publisher (whitman.com) and elsewhere.

As acknowledged by the ANA Grading Guide (note at p. 240 of seventh edition) Capped Bust, lettered edge half dollars are frequently weakly struck in areas including the clasp and hair. The large amount of remaining luster on this coin indicates that the weakness on the clasp and surrounding area of the hair are due to striking weakness.

1877 gold dollar, mintage 3,900; now NGC graded MS 61:

I think that the OP knows perfectly well that his 1957-D cent is just damaged. I'll refrain from speculating on his motives for claiming that a scraped and crushed coin exhibits "die failure".

Based on the photos, I would say that this 1829 Capped Bust half dollar should grade AU 55 to 58 by today's commercial (NGC or PCGS) grading standards. The coin has some hairlines but probably not enough to be deemed "cleaned". Some pieces of this era that show "rub" are given low mint state grades, but this coin shows definite loss of detail due to wear on Liberty's cap and hair and the eagle's neck and feathers. I like the old small ANACS holders and usually how coins were graded in them. They are becoming a collector's item in their own right. If I were you, I wouldn't remove the coin from the holder and resubmit it.

@samclemen3991--Coins used in "mint sets", especially from the 1960s and 70s, weren't different from those "actually MADE to circulate". They are frequently bag marked or otherwise abraded, struck from worn dies, and show no signs of having been given any special striking or handling. It appears that random bags were sent from the production floor to be used in "mint sets". These coins can't really be considered collector's issues; they were just packaged and sold to collectors. Many of the uncirculated coins of this era that are sold as singles, certified or uncertified, likely originated in these sets. One dealer who handles a lot of modern coins, both certified and uncertified, is Wayne Herndon Rare Coins, https://wayneherndon.com/index.php/about/. Herndon's business is largely wholesale and dealer to dealer but does offer coins to collectors at coin shows in the mid-Atlantic region at reasonable prices.

You really do need to provide photos of the entire coin for us to evaluate it properly. I think that what your closeup shows is simply the base of the steps at the right side of the building on the current (2006 to date) version of the Jefferson nickel, which is more deeply engraved than the steps themselves. Here is a closeup of the same area on a 2008-S proof nickel, where you can see the same deeper line at the base: