Error Other | 1983 copper/zinc cent?

[Sheila ruley]

This cent weighs between 2.9 to 3.0 grams. It seems to show some zinc on the scraped up reverse. Can anyone explain why the weight is off? Too light to be all copper and too heavy to be all zinc.

[willbrooks]

I agree that it does appear to be showing some zinc on the reverse, so if that is definitely the case, then we can rule out a solid copper-alloy planchet, or an off-metal error. Then the remaining possibilities are:

Either the coin picked up some denser materials embedded in the coin when the tractor trailer ran over it, or else
the coin was made from planchet stock that was rolled too thick. This would be a mint error. Do you have calipers or can you compare the thickness to a regular cent?

Rolled Thin (or Thick) Planchet Stock: The sheet metal from which coin blanks are cut can sometimes be off-spec, being too thin or too thick. Coin blanks cut from rolled-thin stock will result in an thinner, underweight coin and, because of its thinness, may not receive a full strike. A coin blank cut from rolled-thick stock will be thicker and overweight. A cent should be 1.52 mm thick. Copper-alloy cents should weigh 3.11 grams, and copper-plated zinc cents should weigh 2.5 grams.

[Sheila ruley]

Ok, the one on your right is another 1983 cent. It weighs 2.5 grams. The one on your left is the cent in question. It weighs between 2.9 grams and 3.0 grams. Depending on where it is on the scale. The 2 cents seem to be the same wigth. Some of the other cents seem to be slightly thinner, but they still weigh 2.5 grams. Where as the cent in question still weighs more than the average zinc cent but less than the copper cent.

[Sheila ruley]

Is there any possibility that it could be a transitional cent? I know it would be almost impossible to find though.

[enamel7]

Is there any possibility that it could be a transitional cent? I know it would be almost impossible to find though.

I don't exactly know what you mean. There were no transitional cents. Beginning in 1982 they were either copper or plated zinc. Your coin shows a zinc core so it's a normal cent. It was probably cut from some thicker stock. In it's condition it's just a damaged cent.

[Sheila ruley]

Ok. I had read something about the wrong metal in the machine when they started the 1983 cents and they were called the transitional cents. Very rare. The wrong weight seems to be the confusing part of it. I have compared the cent with other 1983 cents with the same width as the one in question. All of the normal ones weigh 2.5 grams. This makes me wonder if it is a mint error.

[onecent1909]

what you are talking about is 1983 cent struck on pure copper planchettes
they wheigh the pre 1982 weights.
BUT your coin shows the zinc inside. so that is not a possibility

[jfines69]

Not a copper alloy solid cent but still interesting... Since both of your samples appear to be the same thickness a I would check the thickness and diameter with a caliper... If you have one or can get access to one that would help... With half a gram difference in weight I would think the thickness difference would be easily visible??? If both coins are the same thickness and diameter it is possible that the zinc core was contaminated with either iron (steel) or even lead??? That or like Will suggested about the tractor trailer

[Sheila ruley]

Tractor trailer sounds about right lol! It does not stick to a magnet at all. I am just so curious as to what may have caused this. I know if I sent it in it would probably be labeled as damaged.

[Sheila ruley]

Yes, I think that is what I had read.