Error Other | 1969 S Error Penny - S for strange?

[Guest]

Hey guys, might have something interesting here. I picked up a box of coins at a garage sale last weekend, the lady said they her mothers coin collection; there were a few 1800s British coins that were visually appealing although not particularly rare, a hand full of wheat pennys, a few 1 to 5 cent stamps, and a lot of tokens. I decided to get the box for the brits. After I got back I sorted the coins and and almost tossed this one thinking it was just a penny that had been hit with a hammer or been though a coin roller, but upon closer inspection I'm no so sure...

Noted features:
Distinct ridges on the face of the coin, both sides of Lincoln
Odd rectangular impression and pattern to the left of Lincoln
Sagging/jagged boarder on the back, particularly above the S and A of 'states'
Circular impression on the back, particularly noticeable along the bottom
Slightly tapering profile, thickest on the date side of Lincoln and thinner on the opposite
flattened edge near the date
Oddly formed surfaced on the back, not sure how to describe it
Bulge in the center of the memorial
3 tool or pry marks along the edge, below 'Cent' on the back

...what am I looking at here?

[stoneman227]

From its appearance I am guessing that if you placed another cent on top of it , your coin would be larger in all directions. If so then it appears that someone placed it between two pieces of material like leather and beat it with a hammer to distort it. Let me know if this seems to be the case.

John

[Roller]

Post mint damage. Mangled.

[willbrooks]

Yeah, that was damaged after it left the mint. Hammer job. Welcome to the forum and keep up the hunt.

[jfines69]

Nice hammer job!!!

[TJ1952]

Hey, I think that was the one I did with my fathers hammer when I was 10. Can I have it back please!

[Ren]

Hey, I think that was the one I did with my fathers hammer when I was 10. Can I have it back please!

I highly doubt that this coin was simply 'hit with a hammer' as the material deformation does not fit that type of damage. View all of the images and consider the varying thickness and defects of the boarder on both sides of the coin, along with the peculiar aspects of the coins appearance. I have not responded to this thread previously because thus far there has been nothing posted that I didn't post in the initial comment; As I said, I myself assumed it was hit or rolled when I first saw it, but when you take a closer look the coin becomes much more interesting.

Stoneman's idea of it having been placed between layers of material is valid although it wouldn't explain the defects on the boarders of the coin or the peculiar types of distortion seen as even with a layer to pad an impact the coin's features would still be compressed rather more than they would be distorted and that is not what we see here.

I've since considered heat as a possible means of replicating the distortions, but the sharpness of the coin's features seem to bar this as the cause.

S still stands for strange here, I invite anyone to share their thoughts but please don't shtpst.

[TJ1952]

I highly doubt that this coin was simply 'hit with a hammer' as the material deformation does not fit that type of damage. View all of the images and consider the varying thickness and defects of the boarder on both sides of the coin, along with the peculiar aspects of the coins appearance. I have not responded to this thread previously because thus far there has been nothing posted that I didn't post in the initial comment; As I said, I myself assumed it was hit or rolled when I first saw it, but when you take a closer look the coin becomes much more interesting.

Stoneman's idea of it having been placed between layers of material is valid although it wouldn't explain the defects on the boarders of the coin or the peculiar types of distortion seen as even with a layer to pad an impact the coin's features would still be compressed rather more than they would be distorted and that is not what we see here.

I've since considered heat as a possible means of replicating the distortions, but the sharpness of the coin's features seem to bar this as the cause.

S still stands for strange here, I invite anyone to share their thoughts but please don't shtpst.

Sorry, I was just being facetious. It doesn't have to be a hammer, it could have been anything. Just can't believe something like that could leave the Mint. But hey, maybe you're right. If a dime/nail can leave the mint and be graded, I guess your cent could leave the mint.

[willbrooks]

I highly doubt that this coin was simply 'hit with a hammer' as the material deformation does not fit that type of damage. View all of the images and consider the varying thickness and defects of the boarder on both sides of the coin, along with the peculiar aspects of the coins appearance. I have not responded to this thread previously because thus far there has been nothing posted that I didn't post in the initial comment; As I said, I myself assumed it was hit or rolled when I first saw it, but when you take a closer look the coin becomes much more interesting.

Stoneman's idea of it having been placed between layers of material is valid although it wouldn't explain the defects on the boarders of the coin or the peculiar types of distortion seen as even with a layer to pad an impact the coin's features would still be compressed rather more than they would be distorted and that is not what we see here.

I've since considered heat as a possible means of replicating the distortions, but the sharpness of the coin's features seem to bar this as the cause.

S still stands for strange here, I invite anyone to share their thoughts but please don't shtpst.

So, my question to you is, "WHAT DOES IT MATTER!?" Whether it was hit by a hammer, or a pipe wrench, or angry woman's rolling pin, or squeezed in a vice, or run over by a speeding locomotive! It is a damaged cent. It is worthless. How it came to be damaged will never be known for sure since we weren't there when it happened. But I can assure you, it was in fact damaged after it was minted. This is not an opinion. It is a fact. I am 100% positive. With ZERO doubt. Guaranteed. Bet my life on it. And you will have to tell me what "shtpst" means, because I don't know.

[Maineman750]

Damage, no doubt about it.

[enamel7]

Absolutely damage. I realize you're new to the forum, but unlike other forums the long time members on here won't steer you wrong. Unlike other forums that will attack and make fun of you.

[jfines69]

Ren,
Your coin was damaged after leaving the mint... The obv appears some what concave and the rev some what convex... Also on the obv the high points on Abe have been flattened which indicate it was hit in such a manner as a hammer would strike an object... On the rev all of the devices appear to have been flattened during a hit while the coin was sitting on something soft such as a piece of leather... This is indicated by the sunk in appearance of the devices and the slide distortion of the field areas... Hopefully this explanation does not appear to be a shtpst to you as I may joke around a lot like others here but like others here I will not purposely mislead any one... Your original post asked a lot of questions and hopefully I have answered a few... If so it would be nice to know and it would also be nice to know what you think caused the Post Mint Damage or Post Strike Damage (PSD) to your coin???
Jim

[jallengomez]

Once you learn the minting process, you won't have to start by trying to figure out how a coin could have been damaged, you'll simply know that it was damaged because there is nothing in the minting process that could have caused the coin to look that way. I couldn't care less about how a coin was damaged; it's enough for me to know why it couldn't have come from the mint that way.

[mustbebob]

Ren, there is literally hundreds of years of experience here on this forum. Believe me when I say we have seen it all. The coin was damaged after it was placed in circulation. As others have mentioned, unless we actually witnessed how the damage occurred, everything is based on our collective experiences. You came here for an opinion and everyone who has responded has pretty much agreed to what it is. It sure can be considered 'S for Strange' but sometimes, it is best not to over analyze things like this. Thank you for your post.