1983 Lincoln Cent Bleeding Ear 0

[Posso]

I’m getting addicted to coins.

I thought I seen this online on a site or YouTube, even crazier I just found one. 😀Lincoln’s ear looks like it’s bleeding, not to mention the cauliflower ear. 1983 cent

Edited December 5, 2022 by Posso

[Coinbuf]

Just plating bubbles.

[Posso]

On 12/5/2022 at 3:03 PM, Coinbuf said:

Just plating bubbles.

They all bubbled up in the exact right place. It look like a hit job to me. Thanks

[RWB]

As more people look at their pocket change, the number very minor errors increases. Many on-line shysters promote these things as if they were worth a lot of money, but their real goal is to collect email and other personal information to sell to scammers and marketers.

Experienced collectors can help cut through the on-line lies and deception by providing factual information, and then encouraging folks to look into real coin collecting as an interesting hobby and outlet for historical interests.

(Oh....sorry....plating bubbles are common and of no value. Keep up that college saving fund for the kids! )

[Posso]

On 12/5/2022 at 3:20 PM, RWB said:

As more people look at their pocket change, the number very minor errors increases. Many on-line shysters promote these things as if they were worth a lot of money, but their real goal is to collect email and other personal information to sell to scammers and marketers.

Experienced collectors can help cut through the on-line lies and deception by providing factual information, and then encouraging folks to look into real coin collecting as an interesting hobby and outlet for historical interests.

(Oh....sorry....plating bubbles are common and of no value. Keep up that college saving fund for the kids! )

I couldn’t disagree more, it’s all in the eye of the beholder. I don’t believe anyone on this site is looking to strike it rich.

(By the way my kids put themselves trough college. Waste not want not. I haven’t sold a thing and I’ve collected antiques my entire life! )

[Sandon]

   You are welcome to enjoy collecting whatever you find interesting.  You should, however, understand what it is that you are collecting. The relevant knowledge in this case is that the mint changed the composition of one cent coins during the second half of 1982 from a solid brass alloy (95% copper, 5% zinc) to a nearly pure zinc blank that had been electroplated with copper. It took some years for the mint's planchet (blank) vendors to perfect the electroplating process, with the result that a large proportion of the cents of this composition dated from 1982 through 1991 or so are plagued with bubbles and other raised areas in the plating.  The gases trapped in the bubbles have been known to promote corrosion of both the copper plating and the underlying zinc.  Most collectors avoid them and prefer examples without plating defects.

  I posted on your "1969-S Not a Variety" topic references to resources that may help you as a new collector of errors and of U.S. coins generally.

[RWB]

On 12/5/2022 at 5:55 PM, Posso said:

I couldn’t disagree more, it’s all in the eye of the beholder. I don’t believe anyone on this site is looking to strike it rich.

No need to be defensive. What you imagine you see does not determine reality. You'll have to deal with it.

[Posso]

On 12/5/2022 at 4:24 PM, Sandon said:

   You are welcome to enjoy collecting whatever you find interesting.  You should, however, understand what it is that you are collecting. The relevant knowledge in this case is that the mint changed the composition of one cent coins during the second half of 1982 from a solid brass alloy (95% copper, 5% zinc) to a nearly pure zinc blank that had been electroplated with copper. It took some years for the mint's planchet (blank) vendors to perfect the electroplating process, with the result that a large proportion of the cents of this composition dated from 1982 through 1991 or so are plagued with bubbles and other raised areas in the plating.  The gases trapped in the bubbles have been known to promote corrosion of both the copper plating and the underlying zinc.  Most collectors avoid them and prefer examples without plating defects.

  I posted on your "1969-S Not a Variety" topic references to resources that may help you as a new collector of errors and of U.S. coins generally.

I totally agree those zinc copper plated pennies pretty bad. Some are homely looking and look like forgeries or science a project gone bad. LOL  Thanks again 

 

[Opiniaster]

 It's amazing how a simple coin can generate so much discussion and interest. I'm not an expert on coins or numismatics, but I think it's cool that the 1983 Lincoln cent with the "bleeding ear" error has become a sought-after piece. And I enjoy such types of "history lessons" because college ones are so boring and I often use this source https://eduzaurus.com/plagiarism-checker to get help with some of my study tasks. It just goes to show that even small anomalies can make a big difference in the world of collecting. 

Edited May 31, 2023 by Opiniaster

[Coinbuf]

On 5/19/2023 at 9:05 AM, Opiniaster said:

 It's amazing how a simple coin can generate so much discussion and interest. I'm not an expert on coins or numismatics, but I think it's cool that the 1983 Lincoln cent with the "bleeding ear" error has become a sought-after piece. It just goes to show that even small anomalies can make a big difference in the world of collecting. 

What information leads you to believe that a "bleeding ear" (there is no such thing by the way) is sought after?

Edited May 19, 2023 by Coinbuf

[VKurtB]

On 12/5/2022 at 4:55 PM, Posso said:

I couldn’t disagree more, it’s all in the eye of the beholder. I don’t believe anyone on this site is looking to strike it rich.

(By the way my kids put themselves trough college. Waste not want not. I haven’t sold a thing and I’ve collected antiques my entire life! )

You're free to disagree all you like. You'd be wrong, HORRIBLY wrong.

[VKurtB]

On 5/19/2023 at 11:05 AM, Opiniaster said:

 It's amazing how a simple coin can generate so much discussion and interest. I'm not an expert on coins or numismatics, but I think it's cool that the 1983 Lincoln cent with the "bleeding ear" error has become a sought-after piece. It just goes to show that even small anomalies can make a big difference in the world of collecting. 

But. they truly DO NOT!!

[EagleRJO]

On 12/5/2022 at 5:00 PM, Posso said:

I’m getting addicted to coins.

Welcome to coin collecting!  

On 12/5/2022 at 5:00 PM, Posso said:

I thought I seen this online on a site or YouTube, even crazier I just found one. 😀Lincoln’s ear looks like it’s bleeding, not to mention the cauliflower ear. 1983 cent

First, there are no recognized "bleeding ear" or "cauliflower", or anything similar, varieties or errors for the 1983 cent ... [www.coppercoins.com/lincoln/date.php, lincolncentresource.com/Errors/Lincoln_Cent_Errors.html, www.ngccoin.com/variety-plus/, and www.error-ref.com/].

What is around and below Lincoln's ear on that 1983 cent is not anything like the 1984 double ear (attached), and appears to be either plating bubbles or die chips.  Die chips would not likely line up the way it kind of does, and there were significant problems with the copper plated zinc planchets starting in 1983 as noted by Sandon, including frequent bubbles, so it's very likely plating bubbles.

Regardless of which one caused the raised areas, it's not an error.  Plating bubbles are a defect, or damage, and die chips are considered a result of normal wear on working dies.  Even though the raised areas would not be a variety or error, I still think it looks cool, and would put it in a flip with an appropriate label to throw in the save box.

On 5/19/2023 at 12:05 PM, Opiniaster said:

... I think it's cool that the 1983 Lincoln cent with the "bleeding ear" error has become a sought-after piece. It just goes to show that even small anomalies can make a big difference in the world of collecting. 

It's not clear to me who, other than the op and maybe a click-bait you-tuber that had a 1980's cent with similar plating bubbles, is seeking these types of one-off plating defects, or how this has made "a big difference".  Perhaps you could clarify and elaborate on that.

On 5/19/2023 at 12:59 PM, Coinbuf said:

What information leads you to believe that a "bleeding ear" (there is no such thing by the way) is sought after?

Do you really need to ask?  

Edited May 20, 2023 by EagleRJO

[Just Bob]

The OP has not visited this site in over a year, and the new poster, Opiniaster, is likely a spammer or spambot.

[ldhair]

Interesting coin. I don't question that what we are seeing are plating bubbles but it's a bit cool how they line up to have the look of a die crack. I can see how some would argue that it's a crack. 

I wish that folks would quit giving stuff like this a funky name. It makes people think it's something special when it is not. What really gets me is when someone is told the truth but still turn around and list it on ebay as if it is something rare. There are already enough dishonest jerks on ebay.

[VKurtB]

On 5/21/2023 at 6:10 AM, ldhair said:

Interesting coin. I don't question that what we are seeing are plating bubbles but it's a bit cool how they line up to have the look of a die crack. I can see how some would argue that it's a craick. 

I wish that folks would quit giving stuff like this a funky name. It makes people think it's something special when it is not. What really gets me is when someone is told the truth but still turn around and list it on ebay as if it is something rare. There are already enough dishonest jerks on ebay.

... and they are growing in number by leaps and bounds on a nearly weekly basis. So many scams and spams lately on eBay. Some lady wanted $445 for a common worn 1966 quarter. IT HAD NO MINTMARK!!! Whoopee!