Not recognized as a Mint error? 1 1

[Stan Gioia]

Thought I had a major fined, a 1982 D small date 1c that weighed 2.82 grams and looked to me to be bronze. The coins reverse edge had been scraped and the planchet was a golden color. Zinc would show silver so I was sure I had something big. Had a metallurgical test done and it showed the coin is 65% zinc and 34% copper. The coin was designated zinc and I tried and tried but the graders would not budge, it was incapsulated a zinc with reverse damage. A 1c zinc should weigh 2.50 grams and contain 97.5% zinc with 2.50% copper plating. My coin is 2/3rds zinc 1/3rd copper, 13.6 times, more copper than it should, not enough to make it 1c bronze but I still think labeling it zinc does not do it justice.

[Mike Meenderink]

Please show us the metallurgical testing print out. Until then I call BS. A big problem is the coin is not graded or encapsulated which tells me you are full of it. If anything, you say is true the coin would be in a holder with a metallurgical breakdown printed on the holder with the grade. So... there's that

Edited May 17 by Mike Meenderink

[Coinbuf]

The edge looks silver in your awful microscope photos.  Pro tip, if you want help provide good crooped photos of both sides of the coin not screen shots like these.  And also be more transparent with the information.   What did you try and try, does that mean you submitted the same coin more than once?  Who did the metallurgical testing and using what equipment?  Why do you not show a photo of the raw coin on a scale to demonstrate the weight?

All you have posted are accusations and extraordinary claims with no evidence to back up those claims.  I'm not sure what you think anyone here can do to help without better information and evidence of your claims.

[Just Bob]

The original post about this coin, showing it in a PCGS details holder, can be found about halfway down the page in this thread: https://boards.ngccoin.com/topic/431781-1982-d-small-date-bronze-penny/#comment-9872540

[VKurtB]

A metallurgical test on a plated coin is meaningless. The reading depends on how much core is revealed. Even an XRF should show pure copper if no zinc is exposed.  

[Just Bob]

On 5/17/2024 at 12:00 PM, VKurtB said:

A metallurgical test on a plated coin is meaningless. The reading depends on how much core is revealed. Even an XRF should show pure copper if no zinc is exposed.  

+1

[Sandon]

   On March 25 in a previous thread, the OP admitted that "[t]rying to prove it is bronze I made a big mistake and scraped some of the edge", which undoubtedly exposed some of the zinc core. The most likely explanation, which is usually the correct one, for this coin being somewhat overweight for a copper plated zinc cent but definitely underweight for a brass (95% copper, 5% zinc) cent is that the coin was struck on a slightly thicker than normal copper plated zinc planchet. Coins struck on slightly thin or thick planchets aren't rare and don't command much if any premium.

   We all dream of finding a rare and valuable coin in circulation, but the odds of actually finding one are infinitesimally small. That's what "rare" means, after all.

[Coinbuf]

On 5/17/2024 at 9:59 AM, Just Bob said:

The original post about this coin, showing it in a PCGS details holder, can be found about halfway down the page in this thread: https://boards.ngccoin.com/topic/431781-1982-d-small-date-bronze-penny/#comment-9872540

Thanks Bob, this seemed familiar but I didn't check his previous threads.   Funny thing tho, while he does show a cracked genuine PCGS slab in that thread you linked he doesn't show the front of the slab where the coin info would be.  I wonder if that is the real or correct slab for this coin,  somehow I doubt that we will ever know for sure.

[RWB]

The proportions of coin weights to alloy density (as posted) should be the same, but they are not. Also, as mentioned above XRF cannot give bulk composition for plated materials.

[Stan Gioia]

Seems like a tough crowd, but here is what I have. I did submit to PCGS, they said it was zinc. I tried to prove them wrong and had the metallurgic test done by NGC as shown by the attached form. The picture of the two coins was taken after I removed my coin from the PCGS holder. 

[Coinbuf]

Thanks for the additional information and photos, that does help a great deal.   So, it seems from all the evidence that you have a zinc core cent with the copper plating of which many were struck.   It is possible that (as Sandon Alluded to) this planchet was slightly overweight and/or that the copper coating was thicker than spec.    Remember that the mint doesn't weigh individual blanks/planchets/coins so blanks punched from the middle of the strip can at times be overweight just as blanks punched from the end of a strip can be underweight.   And while I would think it's very uncommon, it is possible that this coin is both overweight and has a thicker copper coating.   It is also possible that this coin was given an extra copper coating outside the mint.

I cannot stress enough how important it is not to damage coins in the rush to prove something, if in the future you really think you have something it is best to let the pros take a look and make that determination without scratching or scraping the coin.

[RWB]

Planchets are coated before they reach the Mints. Samples are tested routinely for compliance with specifications. If your coin weighing 2.8 grams were a bulk alloy it's density should be 7.687 g/c^3. Plated coins will have a somewhat lower density due to voids in the plating. The bulk density of current zinc cents is about 7.05 to 7.10 g/c^3 but that is not one of the contract specifications....only the thickness and purity of copper are.

The NGC report omits critical details about beam diameter and energy, so the percentages are not of much use.

Given the date of 1982-D, the planchet might have been an outlier, or it might have been part of a test batch, or other options, but without supporting documentation, there is nothing more that NGC can truthfully state.

[Mike Meenderink]

@RWB @Coinbuf @Just Bob @Sandon Me: "Penny for your thoughts?"   "Rare" Lincoln Cent error hunter: "Yea sure I'm a Lincoln Cent error hunter so that's about what their worth...deal" 

[VKurtB]

Here’s a hint, just for 💩’s and giggles: NEVER SCRAPE A COIN, ESPECIALLY ONE YOU THINK MAY BE IMPORTANT. Even if you had been correct, scraping a coin makes you wrong. The key to this hobby is PRESERVATION, not monkeying around with stuff. 

[powermad5000]

It is a shame you scraped this coin which now gives it a permanent details grade on what otherwise could have been straight graded. It is possible this condition found on error-ref.com was not detected at either NGC or PCGS :    https://www.error-ref.com/thick-plating/

Sometimes you need to have someone besides a TPG have a look at a coin like this and provide you with some supporting documentation from a specialist to send in with your submission to the TPG. I would have contacted Sullivan Numismatics about this coin before scraping it.

[RWB]

Nothing on the XRF report states if the beam were aimed at the face or scraped part of the edge. This omission suggests a lack of specialized training on the part of the technician.