Error Filled Dies | 1986-P Greaser or Weak Strike?

[profiler]

I can't tell if the attached is a greaser or weak strike. In reading the diagnostics on error-ref here, http://www.error-ref.com/?s=weak+strike, it seems to me like it could go either way. (Apologies for horrible pics: This is a normal, copper-colored zinc cent. I couldn't get the colors right on scope.)

The case for weak strike: The weakness is about the same on both faces and the beveled rim of the planchet is retained.

The case for greaser: It has a well-developed design rim and the edge is tall and vertical (it's as thick if not thicker than most zinc cents).

The case for either: The obverse rim is flat (barely raised); on the reverse, it's slightly raised.

Your thoughts? Thanks in advance for your ideas.

[jfines69]

To me it looks like a worn strike thru... Cool tho... I like that both sides are affected!!!

[jmangham]

Cool coin. I hope it is a true mint error. I am anxious to find out what it is.

[joel]

Either way it is a keeper!! Very neat find!!

[Roller]

The rims being fully formed and squared, the coin is a struck through, likely grease.

[mikediamond]

The well-formed design rims clearly show that this is a grease strike.

[profiler]

I just compared greasers with weak strikes on error-ref. I now see the stark difference based on the well-formed rims. Thank you all for helping me see that. Best wishes.

[profiler]

BJ Neff just posted this coin on error-ref.com on the struck-through-grease page (sort of an attribution...): http://www.error-ref.com/?s=struck+through

Thanks again to all of you for helping me identify this error.

[jfines69]

That's cool... Congrats!!!