error or fake

8 posts • viewed 185 times

Got this coin but can't find any reference to it. Can someone help identify it?

Welcome to Numista. Definitely authentic. This is a major cud error and beautifully preserved. We can infer the approximate date by looking at the engravers initials (FG)and its location. 1974 - 1992. Please look at the notes on the Numista page regarding the engravers initials for Lincoln Memorial Cents.

 

Edit: Explanations of Die Breaks and Cuds for your information.http://lincolncentsonline.com/cuds.html

 

 

 

 

Yes, a very nice cud.

 

The legend is partly missing on the reverse because there was no die on the other side to push the metal into the letters. 

 

Yet we do see a “phantom” legend when opening in a new tab, full size view.

₱o$₮ag€ $₮am₱$ a₹€ mo₹€ £€₲i₮ima₮€ a$ a ƒo₹m oƒ ¢u₹₹€nc¥ ₮ha₦ ₮h€ €₦₮i₹€ "¢oi₦" ₱₹odu¢₮io₦ oƒ ₦au₹u o₹ ₦iu€. ••• £€$ ₮im฿₹€$-₱o$₮€ $o₦₮ ₱£u$ £é₲i₮im€$ €₦ ₮a₦t qu'o฿j€₮$ mo₦é₮ai₹€$ qu€ £a ₱₹odu¢₮io₦ €₦₮iè₹€ d€ «mo₦₦ai€$» d€ ₦au₹u ou d€ ₦iu€.

compare here: 

http://cuds-on-coins.com/lincoln-cent-cuds-no-date/

Any explanation to why on ALL these coins the error is located at more or less the same place? 

Dejan

Any explanation to why on ALL these coins the error is located at more or less the same place? 

The same defective die struck multiple coins before detection by mint employees. As far as cuds are concerned generally speaking, dies wear at their weakest points first, around the edges where there is less material to support it and prone to failure.

Dejan

Any explanation to why on ALL these coins the error is located at more or less the same place? 

Because the link provided was limited to only cuds-no date examples.  There are many other examples of cuds on Lincoln cents not involving the date:

 

http://cuds-on-coins.com/lincoln-cent-cuds-1909-present/ 

Thank you! 

» Forum policy

Used time zone is UTC+1:00.
Current time is 06:36.