RPM or no?

[Barzilla]

Comments? What is this?

[seal006]

plating issues?

[simonm]

Post moved. Please do not post questions about your own coins in other people's threads.
I agree with Sean. The coin looks like it has plating issues.

[My2cents]

There are no such things as plating issues. The coins are plated and then minted.

[My2cents]

of course as to whether they are RPM's that is another story.

[seal006]

There are no such things as plating issues. The coins are plated and then minted.

And when the are minted that plating can crack in odd ways, especially around the devices. Welcome to LCR. Not exactly a good way to make an entrance.

[jallengomez]

There are no such things as plating issues. The coins are plated and then minted.

Really?! Gas bubbles, zinc rot, split-plate doubling? There are certainly are.

[willbrooks]

This is plating-split doubling, one of the many PLATING ISSUES common on plated cents.

[My2cents]

I would suggest a more scientific approach. I suppose it has nothing to do with heat, friction, and movement from the die ejection process? Could it be the plating is just one factor in the creation of this particular anomaly? Maybe the RPM was there first and then after a die ejection anomaly a ripple effect occurred in a millisecond of heat transfer between the die and the ejection process. I know it is easy to just dismiss a possible die variety from photographs, heck I have seen experts miss a doubled die, and other less obvious varieties. But just because is not a good case.

[seal006]

OR the fact that zinc is extremely soft, and the copper plate layer is very thin. There is no just because here. You can see the zinc in the photos. AND this is VERY common on the early year zincolns. VERY common.

[simonm]

Split plating is notorious for mimicking an RPM on the mid-to-late 1980's RPMs. You can even see similar effects on early 1990's coins as well. That is the case here. The copper split open and exposed the zinc.

[My2cents]

Okay I buy your hypothesis so far, but then tell me why this does not occur on the date?

[willbrooks]

I would suggest a more scientific approach. I suppose it has nothing to do with heat, friction, and movement from the die ejection process? Could it be the plating is just one factor in the creation of this particular anomaly? Maybe the RPM was there first and then after a die ejection anomaly a ripple effect occurred in a millisecond of heat transfer between the die and the ejection process. I know it is easy to just dismiss a possible die variety from photographs, heck I have seen experts miss a doubled die, and other less obvious varieties. But just because is not a good case.

I didn't see anyone making the case that the plating did this to itself. OF COURSE there were other factors involved in causing the plating to split. However, an RPM is created on a coin because it exists on the die, and has nothing to do with a striking problem, nor an ejection problem, nor a plating disturbance.

[willbrooks]

Okay I buy your hypothesis so far, but then tell me why this does not occur on the date?

It does, often, just not in this case. I have one where the plating is split the entire way around the memorial building and on almost every device on the entire reverse.

[seal006]

Okay I buy your hypothesis so far, but then tell me why this does not occur on the date?

Because in 1986 the mint mark was put on the working die by hand. This mint mark could have struck that die with enough force to make a deep impression than the date that was already there. This would mean that the force of the die at the point where the mint mark is would be in contact with the planchet longer than any other place on the die.