What do you think about the new 1943/42-S Lincoln Cent OverDate recently confirmed by experts? — Welcome to the CAC Educational Forum

What do you think about the new 1943/42-S Lincoln Cent OverDate recently confirmed by experts?

A new World War II overdate variety, a 1943/1942-S Lincoln cent, has been identified by variety experts, after being listed as a “regular” 1943 Lincoln, Doubled Die Obverse cent for years.

About a month ago, longtime collector James Elliott contacted me via the internet and said that another collector in the die variety collecting field, Pete Apple, had recommended that he contact me about a 1943-S Lincoln cent that he had with a known doubled die obverse that he thought was also a 1943/2-S overdate.  To read more click here. https://www.coinworld.com/news/us-coins/experts-confirm-1943-1942-s-lincoln-cent-overdate-variety

Comments

  • My prediction: Many specimens of this minor variety will be found and prices will decline.
  • What if someone discovered a 1943/2- S copper variety overdate  . Would it be more rare than any other 43 variety ?  What's your opinion on that?
  • rdsimpson said:

    What if someone discovered a 1943/2- S copper variety overdate  . Would it be more rare than any other 43 variety ?  What's your opinion on that?

    Hopefully, you’re not referring to the coin you have pictured. As based on the shape and placement of the last numeral in the date, it can’t be a “3”.
  • It is indeed an overdate. I think prices and pops will remain similar.
  • MarkFeld said:
    What if someone discovered a 1943/2- S copper variety overdate  . Would it be more rare than any other 43 variety ?  What's your opinion on that?
    Hopefully, you’re not referring to the coin you have pictured. As based on the shape and placement of the last numeral in the date, it can’t be a “3”.

    I discovered my coim on October 20, 2021  almost a year before experts confirmed it's existence in May 2022   For months I heard the same thing . --it doesn't exist!;  And them what do know In May 2022 experts found it does actually exist. Considering that I'm gonna have go with my own eyes on this one but thanks for commenting 🤗

  • i do not understand what we are being shown on that coin

    how was the "overdate" struck?
  • i do not understand what we are being shown on that coin

    how was the "overdate" struck?

    We’re being shown a coin that the poster claims is a 1943, despite the fact that the last numeral in the date has the wrong shape and placement for a 3.

    I suspect that 1) nothing anyone says to him will convince him that he doesn’t have a 1943; 2) he won’t submit it to a major grading company company for authentication and 3) if I’m wrong about “2)” and he does submit it, he won’t provide the results.
  • MarkFeld said:

    i do not understand what we are being shown on that coin

    how was the "overdate" struck?

    We’re being shown a coin that the poster claims is a 1943, despite the fact that the last numeral in the date has the wrong shape and placement for a 3.

    I suspect that 1) nothing anyone says to him will convince him that he doesn’t have a 1943; 2) he won’t submit it to a major grading company company for authentication and 3) if I’m wrong about “2)” and he does submit it, he won’t provide the results.
    thanks @MarkFeld
    i feel this op is distracting here and the other posts elsewhere are equally "off topic" .. but i thought i would ask just in case i am overlooking something useful to see
  • edited October 2022
    MarkFeld said:
    i do not understand what we are being shown on that coin how was the "overdate" struck?
    We’re being shown a coin that the poster claims is a 1943, despite the fact that the last numeral in the date has the wrong shape and placement for a 3. I suspect that 1) nothing anyone says to him will convince him that he doesn’t have a 1943; 2) he won’t submit it to a major grading company company for authentication and 3) if I’m wrong about “2)” and he does submit it, he won’t provide the results.

    Your right about 1,  and wrong about 2  and 3.  Looking at the bright side. They don't accept copper 1943 cents .   
  • edited October 2022
     This reevaluation of an existing die variety once again proves that collectors should continue looking closely at their coins and studying the latest information about them

    Despite being one of the most widely collected American coin series, Lincoln cents continue to provide fertile ground for the discovery by collectors and experts of new die varieties but experts" here seem too anxious to declare they found  the real  Holy Grail.

    Yes.  It's no secret there are known examples of experimental cents for 1943 including a Steel planchet coated with Zinc, Antimony, and Iron weighing 2.7 grams,  a Copper plated Steel and those minted on a  dime planchet The 1943 cent with Antimony in the coating appears darker in color than the common 1943 cents.  Several examples of the zinc coated steel  1943/1942-S Lincoln experimental cent have been examined. 

     Furthermore, it is hardly coincidental that such errors occurred more frequently during wartime (with six of the seven major modern overdates having been produced during World War II) because the Mint would have been less likely during that period to destroy a die with an error that was still useable for striking coins. These wrong planchet errors typically occur when a few stray planchets of one denomination remain within a hopper that is subsequently loaded

    One determining factor here  is the coins composition . In 1941 at the start of WWII knowing of the difficulties of the Mint to procure copper and tin, Congress authorized a change in the composition of the Lincoln cents.  From the beginning of the series in 1909, until the emergency measures for World War II began, the Lincoln cent was struck from an alloy of 95% copper  5% "tin" and "zinc" . --- the same alloy used for Indian Head cents from 1864-1909. 


    To free up metals needed for munitions in World War II, and to avoid a coin shortage, the U.S nickel and cent compositions were changed. First, partway through 1942, the tin was removed from the cent, so it became 5% zinc and 95% copper until  December 18, 1942 when the Mint formally announced the  1943 cents would be struck from zinc-coated steel. Later, to free up much-needed copper, the government once again changed the 1943 Lincoln cent to zinc-plated steel. The cents of 1944, 1945, and some of 1946 are struck from salvaged spent cartridge casings reclaimed from troop training areas. The casings were 70% copper and 30% zinc, so enough pure copper was added to make the alloy about the same as the 1942 composition. By the end of 1946, the original Lincoln cent copper alloy, with both tin and zinc, was resumed, and continued until the tin was removed again in 1962.

    The misalignment of the designs between the 1942-dated hub and the 1943-dated hub pivots around a spot on the left obverse rim. Because of this swing, the coin shows only trivial doubling on the word LIBERTY close to the pivot point, but some fairly strong doubling almost due north and south at the base of the 1. There is similar doubling under the top curve of the 9 and along the right side the leg of the 9. There is extra metal below the sharp left angle of the 4 that corresponds in scale to the doubling on the 1 and the 9. Fairly rare early die state coins will also show similar doubling on the base of the 4, but this feature apparently was either worn off or polished off of the die early in its die life

    On this particular die, the outer parts of the design, such as IN GOD WE TRUST, were not formed by the first impression, and so they could not be doubled by the second impression of the hub.  The upper right curve of the 2 was incompletely formed by the first hubbing, while the flat base of the 2 was not formed because it lies closer to the rim.

    Something similar can be seen on the 1943/42-P 5-cent coin, on which the top of the date is closest to the rim. It shows a strong base of the 2 from the original hubbing, but not the center or top of the 2. The result was a 3 over a partial 2. By contrast, if only the bases of LIBERTY and IN GOD WE TRUST were formed by the 1942 hub impression, the letters were simply finished normally by the subsequent 1943 impression.

    Several examples of the 1943/1942-S Lincoln cent have been examined. Only the earliest die states show doubling at the bottom of the upright of the 4. Middle to later die states show some strong vertical die polish lines, as might have been caused by the use of an emery stick to clean the die, in the field above the date.

    Something similar can be seen on the 1943/42-P 5-cent coin, on which the top of the date is closest to the rim. It shows a strong base of the 2 from the original hubbing, but not the center or top of the 2. The result was a 3 over a partial 2. By contrast,  IN GOD WE TRUST were formed by the 1942 hub impression, the letters were simply finished normally by the subsequent 1943 impression.

    Only the earliest die states show doubling at the bottom of the upright of the 4. Middle to later die states show some strong vertical die polish lines, as might have been caused by the use of an emery stick to clean the die, in the field above the date.


    Words alone do not suffice on an error of this magnitude, so readers are directed to the photo to enjoy a better understanding of the scope of the error. Definitely one for the record books!”

    Sources Bullion Shark, Coin World:  US Mint , and named experts (image provided by Richard Simpson 

     




  • rdsimpson said:

     This reevaluation of an existing die variety once again proves that collectors should continue looking closely at their coins and studying the latest information about them

    Despite being one of the most widely collected American coin series, Lincoln cents continue to provide fertile ground for the discovery by collectors and experts of new die varieties but experts" here seem too anxious to declare they found  the real  Holy Grail.

    Yes.  It's no secret there are known examples of experimental cents for 1943 including a Steel planchet coated with Zinc, Antimony, and Iron weighing 2.7 grams,  a Copper plated Stteel and those minter on a  dime planchet The 1943 cent with Antimony in the coating appears darker in color than the common 1943 cents.

     Furthermore, it is hardly coincidental that such errors occurred more frequently during wartime (with six of the seven major modern overdates having been produced during World War II) because the Mint would have been less likely during that period to destroy a die with an error that was still useable for striking coins. 

    This reevaluation of an existing die variety once again proves that collectors should continue looking closely at their coins and studying the latest information about them

    These wrong planchet errors typically occur when a few stray planchets of one denomination remain within a hopper that is subsequently loaded

    One determining factor here  is the coins composition . In 1941 at the start of WWII knowing of the difficulties of the Mint to procure copper and tin, Congress authorized a change in the composition of the Lincoln cents.  From the beginning of the series in 1909, until the emergency measures for World War II began, the Lincoln cent was struck from an alloy of 95% copper  5% "tin" and "zinc" . --- the same alloy used for Indian Head cents from 1864-1909.  To free up metals needed for ammunition in World War II, and to avoid any more shortages, the U.S cent compositions were changed. Partway through 1942, the tin was removed from the cent, so it became 5% zinc (less tin)  and 95% copper until  December 18, 1942 when the Mint formally announced the  1943 cents would be struck from zinc-coated steel. 

    The misalignment of the designs between the 1942-dated hub and the 1943-dated hub pivots around a spot on the left obverse rim. Because of this swing, the coin shows only trivial doubling on the word LIBERTY close to the pivot point, but some fairly strong doubling almost due north and south at the base of the 1. There is similar doubling under the top curve of the 9 and along the right side the leg of the 9. There is extra metal below the sharp left angle of the 4 that corresponds in scale to the doubling on the 1 and the 9. Fairly rare early die state coins will also show similar doubling on the base of the 4, but this feature apparently was either worn off or polished off of the die early in its die life

    On this particular die, the outer parts of the design, such as IN GOD WE TRUST, were not formed by the first impression, and so they could not be doubled by the second impression of the hub.  The upper right curve of the 2 was incompletely formed by the first hubbing, while the flat base of the 2 was not formed because it lies closer to the rim.

    Something similar can be seen on the 1943/42-P 5-cent coin, on which the top of the date is closest to the rim. It shows a strong base of the 2 from the original hubbing, but not the center or top of the 2. The result was a 3 over a partial 2. By contrast, if only the bases of LIBERTY and IN GOD WE TRUST were formed by the 1942 hub impression, the letters were simply finished normally by the subsequent 1943 impression.

    Several examples of the 1943/1942-S Lincoln cent have been examined. Only the earliest die states show doubling at the bottom of the upright of the 4. Middle to later die states show some strong vertical die polish lines, as might have been caused by the use of an emery stick to clean the die, in the field above the date.

    Something similar can be seen on the 1943/42-P 5-cent coin, on which the top of the date is closest to the rim. It shows a strong base of the 2 from the original hubbing, but not the center or top of the 2. The result was a 3 over a partial 2. By contrast,  IN GOD WE TRUST were formed by the 1942 hub impression, the letters were simply finished normally by the subsequent 1943 impression.

    Several examples of the 1943/1942-S Lincoln cent have been examined. Only the earliest die states show doubling at the bottom of the upright of the 4. Middle to later die states show some strong vertical die polish lines, as might have been caused by the use of an emery stick to clean the die, in the field above the date.


    Words alone do not suffice on an error of this magnitude, so readers are directed to the photo to enjoy a better understanding of the scope of the error. Definitely one for the record books!”

    Sources Bullion Shark, Coin World:  US Mint , and  experts 





    Has anyone estimated the mintage and number of survivors? If it involves just one die, as with the 1946 Walker DDR-1, you can accurately estimate based on contemporary die life. But if it involves multiple working dies, master die, master hub, and/or working hub(s), the sky is the limit. After all, there were 191.55 million 1943-S pennies minted.
  • In 1942, the U.S. Mint  during WWll, took all tin out of the Lincoln cent alloy, which technically changed the metal from bronze to brass. It wasn't until emergency legislation ended before tin was used again.   Which in my opinion  should mean no 1943 cent accidentally struck on a 1942 planchet  contains tin  with a composition of 95% Copper and 5% zinc only (no tin) until December 1942 when the composition changed once again to zinc coated steel planchets ..   what your thoughts on the matter . 

  • What about these? I believe all to be WWII experimentals.


    :







  • CACfan said:
    What about these? I believe all to be WWII experimentals. :


    This is the coin provided in the images above . ---Do you really not see what this coin is hiding? 
Sign In or Register to comment.