Know any thing about zinc (unplated) cents?

[robec1347]

One is somewhat of a disaster, one is in good shape with somewhat of a weak strike and one is MS. The ms one I purchased in '87 for $15. The other 2 were found in pocket change. I haven't really found out much about them. Are there any error experts out there that might know a little about them? Is there any premium associated with any particular date?

[WoodenJefferson]

Man, to bad Fred Wienberg or Mike Byers do not post here...Fred wrote the book about error coins and could identify those three in heart beat.

 

Going out on a limb, the top two 88-D and the 83-P look like they may have been de-plated after they left the mint, powdery looking surfaces, signs of minute pitting may reveal some type of chemical reaction with the copper layer.

 

However, the the 86-D looks authentic! A true struck on zinc planchet (missing copper layer) with nice smooth fields and sharp details.

 

This should appease the posters till the calvery arrives...been two hours now, look off into the distance for the dust cloud. Experts may be on vacation.

[robec1347]

Thanks Woody,

 

The 86-D is graded a 64 from ANACS. It was before slabs came into play so it came with a certification with the coins photo on it. You could also be right on the other two.

 

I'll wait for the calvary. Heck, I'm on vacation too. I've got nothing else to do anyway. I'll just circle the wagons.

[Conder101]

I would concur,the 86-D is genuine while the other two are altered.

[robec1347]

I would concur,the 86-D is genuine while the other two are altered.

 

That would certainly explain why the strike on the 83 is so soft, wouldn't it?

[WoodenJefferson]

The actual copper coating is not very thick FYI:

 

Cent blanks arrive pre-punched and ready to strike from Jarden Zinc Products of Greenville, Tenn., which also provides one-cent planchets to the Royal Canadian Mint.

 

Jarden is the successor to Alltrista Zinc Products Company, which spun off in 1993 from Ball Corporation, which won the contract in 1981 to produce the new copper-plated zinc cent planchets. The name has changed, but it’s essentially the same company that’s famous for fabricating the zinc lids for Ball Mason jars.

 

Jarden uses a patented electroplating process to coat its zinc planchets with just 7.5 microns of copper at the center and twice as much on the edge, where the coins are subjected to harsher wear. Zinc is highly ductile, meaning it’s malleable, so it doesn’t need to be annealed (softened by heating) before it is struck.

[DC Dawg]

Cent blanks arrive pre-punched and ready to strike from Jarden Zinc Products of Greenville, Tenn., which also provides one-cent planchets to the Royal Canadian Mint.

Just to clarify, the one-cent planchets used in Canada are made mostly of steel (.940) with a small amount of nickel (.015) plated in copper (.045).

 

Since most vending machines do not take cents, so the electromagnetic signatures are not an issue, I wonder if the composition of the Canadian planchet may be in the United State's future?

 

Scott

[hoard]

I concur. the 86 does definately look authentic. the other two do look plated and thickly plated at that. Nice catch on the 86.

[robec1347]

I concur. the 86 does definately look authentic. the other two do look plated and thickly plated at that. Nice catch on the 86.

 

So instead of being altered by having the plating taken off, there were altered by someone putting it on?

[richbeat]

I concur. the 86 does definately look authentic. the other two do look plated and thickly plated at that. Nice catch on the 86.

 

So instead of being altered by having the plating taken off, there were altered by someone putting it on?

 

 

I think the plating was removed post mint and not added.

[hoard]

I do not know enough about de-plating the copper but my assumption of zinc added is based on the lack of detail in the 88 and 83 coins. In particular, the 88, along the rim and columns on reverse look thick with something. the 83 also has this covered over look. Compare the 86 zinc details to the other two coins and there is a noticable difference in clarity.

 

I could be wrong but it would seem that the removal of a very thin layer of copper would not result in such a significant loss of detail. Of course we are taking about the removal of the copper using acids most likely which is probably providing the pitted and powdery surfaces.

[WoodenJefferson]

Little known fact...Intelligent people have more zinc and copper in their hair.

 

(maybe it comes from osmosis from de-plating 1982 to date Lincoln cents)

 

ed:sp