Who is up for a challenge!

[willbrooks]

I was digging out a couple of lamination errors to send off and I came across this very cool one. Contest time. Here is the contest:
I say that, despite the wear, I can tell you the date of this coin based on the design. Can you? Please tell me the date you think the coin is and WHY YOU THINK SO! I will send the coin to "the winner" who can either keep it as is or unveil the date and expose me as a either a coin scholar or a blithering fraud. Here it is. Answer as many times as you wish, since you must provide evidence of your guess. As always, there will be some nice bonus coins in the package. Contest ends 9/15/15 at 10:00pm eastern. Here she is:
http://www.lincolncentforum.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=103289&stc=1

[profiler]

Hmmm... That's a tough one. It looks like a 1943-S because at high magnification, you can see an imprint of a "3" on the foldover of the delamination.

But it's copper. Wouldn't that make this coin exceedingly rare?

2nd guess would be 1948-S, given that an 8 split vertically down the middle could appear as a 3.

[willbrooks]

Hmmm... That's a tough one. It looks like a 1943-S because at high magnification, you can see animprint of a "3" on the foldover of the delamination.

But it's copper. Wouldn't that make this coin exceedingly rare?

2nd guess would be 1948-S, give than an 8 split vertically down the middle could appear as a 3.


Wasn't it the kinks who said, "pareidolia will destroy ya." :LOL_Hair:

[profiler]

Wasn't it the kinks who said, "pareidolia will destroy ya." :LOL_Hair:

Indeed, Will. But pareidolia did help ancient societies organize chaos and make the world intelligible. Being kind of new at this still, I often revert to that when I can't figure out what I'm doing... lol

P.S. You DON'T see the 3 there on the fold-over, just NE of the 4?

[profiler]

3rd guess: It's a 1942-S because at the edge of the fold-over, you can see a numeral's SW corner peek out. The 2 is the one that fits that shape.

[willbrooks]

Indeed, Will. But pareidolia did help ancient societies organize chaos and make the world intelligible. Being kind of new at this still, I often revert to that when I can't figure out what I'm doing... lol

P.S. You DON'T see the 3 there on the fold-over, just NE of the 4?

Sure, I do see it! So I have registered your answer as "1943 with misplaced 3 struck on copper-alloy planchet." Got it. So far, you are winning. http://www.lincolncentforum.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=103291&stc=1

[CODYJ]

i say a 44s--you can see part of the numeral just west of the lamination peeking out---which would make it part of the 4--

[profiler]

Sure, I do see it!

Hahaha... Oops, okay. I get it. Your pareidolia reference was to my "seeing" an 8... You're right. Even high doses of peyote, mescaline, or psilocybin couldn't conjure up an 8 from the shape of that 3.

P.S. Perfect contextual application of pareidolia. Hats off, Will.

[willbrooks]

Well, if nothing else, I am having fun with this... until I turn out to be wrong, lol.

[Historyhound]

I believe it's a 1944. For me, it's based on the mint mark style.

[jfines69]

Based on the MM... It appears to be a MMS-006 so that would be a 1944, 1945 or a 1946... A little to much glare from the coin to tell for sure... I think it is cool the way the lam covers the date!!!

[Keith]

OK - kinda tough to tell but I am going to take a stab at a "42"! because of the mintmark. To me it looks like a "trumpet tail" which were minted in 41 & 42

[duece2seven]

I'll go for the home run and say it's a 46 with an inverted S!

[JC Stevens]

A well aged 1944-S, the lower tip of the 2nd 4 is peeking out near the bottom of the folder. Also I used I little eggnog and was able to lift the flap to see the second (4).

[Roller]

The ball serif tells me its a '46. And it is not negated by the fold over either.

[jay4202472000]

I think it's a 1946-S with MMS-004 (serif S). The 4 on the 1946's always look shorter to me. It may be just an illusion. Maybe the tail of the 6 tricks me into thinking the 4 is shorter. However, when I look at the first three digits of the date, I just expect to see a 6 at the end. The 4 looks short and dumpy.

[willbrooks]

I think it's a 1946-S with MMS-004 (serif S). The 4 on the 1946's always look shorter to me. It may be just an illusion. Maybe the tail of the 6 tricks me into thinking the 4 is shorter. However, when I look at the first three digits of the date, I just expect to see a 6 at the end. The 4 looks short and dumpy.

DINGDINGDING!!!!! We have a winner! Exactly what I think. This master hub was re-used throughout most of the 40s. The 4 was engraved on the master die each year and in 1946, the 4 is significantly lower than in all the other years in the 40s. There was enough wear on the mint mark that I wasn't even sure about it, but the low 4 tells me this is a 1946. Excellent work, Jay! A couple of others mentioned 1946 too, so I think I'll send out few laminations. If you said 1946, PM me your address and I'll get a lamination out to you. Jay, I'll send you the coin in this thread. This was a lot of fun. Thanks everyone.

[jfines69]

Way to go Jay... Congrats... Wish I would have known or at least remembered :LOL_Hair: about the 4... I could have narrowed it down!!!

[jay4202472000]

Thanks for the contest Will! It feels great to match wits with such well respected, knowledgeable folks! Great fun!

[profiler]

That was a nice contest -- and fun, too. Will, how do you suspect the 3 got there on the metal flap? It's raised the way it's shown, so if the flap was folded back down then it would be incuse. I could imagine it came from another '43 pressed into it -- but it also seems like the higher rims of each coin would prevent that from happening. Your thoughts?

Congratulations, jay!

[willbrooks]

That was a nice contest -- and fun, too. Will, how do you suspect the 3 got there on the metal flap? It's raised the way it's shown, so if the flap was folded back down then it would be incuse. I could imagine it came from another '43 pressed into it -- but it also seems like the higher rims of each coin would prevent that from happening. Your thoughts?

Congratulations, jay!

I wasn't kidding earlier when I said pareidolia. If that were really a 3, then when the lam was folded back to its original position, that 3 wouldn't be anywhere near the correct location. I don't think that is a 3 at all, just some dings and imagination. As for the little nub that appears to be sticking out from under the foldover, I also do not think that is a device. Well, if Jay wants to, he can fold it back and see if we are correct or not. But maybe he will just chose to keep the coin as is. It is up to him. I can live without looking underneath, and just assume I am right. :smile: lol.

[profiler]

I wasn't kidding earlier when I said pareidolia.

You are more than 100% right. We do see what we want to see (at least I do). Even when I wrote the question above, I was seeing a clearly stamped impression of a 3.

I just traced the outline of the shapes (attached) and was surprised how random the hits were to that portion of the flap. I'm humbled by it, actually.

Great lesson for me. Thanks, Will.

[jay4202472000]

Special thanks to Will for the prizes! I have quite a few laminations, but none with the peel attached. He also sent 2 1964-P DDOs and a 1970-D DDO. I haven't had a chance to try to attribute them yet. Thank you so much Will!