EagleRJO

As a follow up there are three basic things to look for when trying to identify a clipped planchet error. A fadeout or fishtailing of details on both sides of the coin moving towards the missing portion from the middle A rounded tapering of the rim moving towards the missing portion along the edge Weak rims and details near the rim on the opposing side of the coin from the missing portion called the "Blakesley Effect" Note that the Blakesley Effect may not be evident with larger coins or a minor clip. The article at the following link is one of the better ones I have seen about identifying true clipped planchets with the diagnostics explained. https://www.australian-coins.com/error-coins/how-to-determine-if-a-clipped-planchet-error-is-real/

I agree those new pics show something different, and the horizontal area is not raised. You have to be careful with descriptions to get accurate information. Those are indentations with only the two curved areas raised where the metal has pushed up from a hit. Just damage as noted.

I agree with JPM that it looks like it took a hard hit to an edge.

On my browser the original topic date shows up with the title in the topic list, and when you click a topic it shows that again right in the middle.

If that mark on the upper leg is raised then is likely the result of a minor damaged die as it's not a clash with that shape or location. Probably something like a piece of metal from the press or another coin got on the die and caused an indentation of the die in that shape. Mostly likely just a curiosity find.

There were no pictures posted, but it may be "worthless" machine doubling instead of a doubled die. See the attached and info on Wexler's site (doubleddie.com) to help tell the difference, and also look up verified doubled dies for your coin.

@powermad5000 you replied to the op on a 3 year old topic where they are long gone, and someone else just piggybacked onto the topic with a similar coin.

Who told you it's a mint error without being able to tell what type of error? In any event the line with two half circles looks incuse, or cut into the coin. In that case it's either struck-through or something stamped on the coin. I can't imagine anything which could end up on the dies during striking that would look like that, so it may be something stamped on the coin after it left the mint. Also let us know if that's something raised on the coin which would change things.

In addition to Coinbuf's suggestion hold your phone close to and directly above the coin while resting your hand on something. Make sure it doesn't get blurry while zooming in before posting.

Did you mean VBD? Should be near the rim along the bottom of Lincoln's bust at about 7 o'clock. Sometimes it doesn't show well and might be partially hidden by the shadow of Lincoln's bust.

It looks incuse, or going into the coin, and a little jagged. If that's the case it's likely a lamination crack in the coin, where some gunk has gotten into the crevice over time. If it's straighter than it looks it could be just a scratch, and if raised it would be something else.

How do you know the coin is uncirculated, and who is saying it wouldn't get an MS grade with an explanation of why they think that. For an MS grade both sides would need to show no signs of wear and have full luster. There is no pic of the reverse, and the obverse has some darkened areas which may be rub marks that break luster knocking it down to an AU grade. About a DDO, there is only one 1969-S cent with a doubled die that has any significant value (DDO FS-101), which includes clear doubling of "God", and that is not one of them as Sandon also noted.

Looks like Coinbuf had it nailed from the beginning. How did you discover this?

Your "Fun With Fakes" series in Coin Week should be required reading for newer collectors considering buying raw coins.

More pics is usually good even if it doesn't change things, so that's fine. Showing it to a dealer familiar with errors, like Sullivan Numismatics, may help to narrow it down having the coin in-hand. But keep in mind there are not a lot of dealers very familiar with error coins, and it will be just another opinion. If it were my coin however I would just put it in a mylar flip labeled as a possible struck thru grease error and toss it in a miscellaneous errors and varieties box since even if a mint error it wouldn't be worth much as that is such a common error.

I don't think there were any foreign "copper" (bronze or brass) coins struck at the San Francisco mint in 1942 that had about the same diameter as the cent and that 2.8g weight. The coin appears to be struck on a planchet with the correct diameter so if that 2.82g weight is a calibrated accurate weight your coin was likely damaged or struck on a blank cut from a thin part of a coil. Note: A rare 1942 cent struck on a wrong foreign coin planchet error with only a slightly larger diameter you may be looking for weighed significantly more than a normal cent and was struck in Philly. Other foreign "copper" coins struck by the mint in 1942 were smaller and/or weighed significantly less than a cent.

The quarter you posted just appears to be improperly annealed which is simply an over heated planchet with either a rearranging of of constituent components within the Cu-Ni cladding bringing more copper to the surface or copper dust contamination on the surface. Nothing related to copper migrating or diffusing thru the outer Cu-Ni cladding. Where can I read about this "molecular copper effervescence" involving the copper core migrating through the outer solid cladding, or perhaps that is a misquote, as I see nothing at error-ref.com which is very comprehensive or any other error references, and considering "effervescence" is the migration of a salt through a porous or crystalline material. In any event those coins like the one you posted would have an overall solid darkened appearance which looks nothing like the variable discolored appearance of the op's coin. https://www.error-ref.com/improper-annealing/

You might be thinking of a copper cent you weighed as a normal clad dime would weigh a little less. Edit: The follow up post indicating a 2.27g weight is about right for a normal clad dime.

The op's coin and other random coins posted with a similar simply discolored appearance don't look anything like the pre-strike missing clad layer coin referenced in the CONECA letter as shown in the bottom right of that image, or similar missing clad layer error coins as shown in the article and webpage I linked above and the attached examples which have a solid copper color that is sometimes a little darkened. So it looks like you were just blowing smoke that a coin similar in appearance to the op's coin was attributed by coneca as being a mint error.

It doesn't have the appearance of a missing or partial clad layer mint error, which would be a solid copper color for an entire side or solid copper color over part of a side which would look like cladding had flaked off similar to the coins shown in the links below. It just appears to be discolored, so the weight is likely not significantly less than the 2.27g mint spec, with each of the outer clad layers weighing about 15% of the gross coin weight or 0.35g each. But perhaps @Ollie3677 can weigh the coin to verify that. If it's just slightly under weight perhaps it was exposed to some environmental condition which erroded away some of the outer cladding, as opposed to simply discoloring the coin which is what it appears to be right off the bat. https://www.pcgs.com/news/missing-clad-layer-mint-error-coins https://www.error-ref.com/partial-clad-layer-before-strike/

I don't appreciate your condescending remarks. I have no desire tracking down what you are claiming exists which I have not previously seen, and now believe to be just you blowing smoke that a coin with a similar appearance was attributed by CONECA as a mint error.

To verify what Sandon was saying about the value see the NGC Price Guide for these coins since you now know a rough grade, which is really the tricky part and takes some time to get a handle on ... https://www.ngccoin.com/price-guide/united-states/dollars/49/

Are you thinking the darker color is from an improperly annealed planchet and that the other spots or colors are from circulation? Maybe you could post some examples of coins with a similar appearance attributed by CONECA as being a mint error, as opposed to simply opinions in a chat concerning the discoloration.

Just looks like a damaged coin if you are referring to the misshapen appearance. It's what would be referred to as a "parking lot coin".

Not my forum, it's NGC's. As far as I'm concerned you are welcome to stick around. I have found it's a good and pretty tolerating grading company, with an open and informative forum that NGC takes more of a hands-off approach to and allows members of the forum to offer honest opinions concerning grading coins.