One sided 1974 penny error or manipulated?

[seuk 85]

Just bought a lot of contemporay counterfeits for my George III collection. In it were also a number of later fakes and then this 1974 one penny descriped as: "1974 Penny, split in half giving the appearance of a brockage."

Now the flan is very thin 0.69-0.76 mm (rim 0.86-1.19 mm), but the raised rim and ghost impression on reverse seems to indicate that it's not simply a split coin? Also the raised rim on obverse is high and sharp on the lower half of the coin.

Any ideas?

[Rob 3,152]

Just bought a lot of contemporay counterfeits for my George III collection. In it were also a number of later fakes and then this 1974 one penny descriped as: "1974 Penny, split in half giving the appearance of a brockage."

Now the flan is very thin 0.69-0.76 mm (rim 0.86-1.19 mm), but the raised rim and ghost impression on reverse seems to indicate that it's not simply a split coin? Also the raised rim on obverse is high and sharp on the lower half of the coin.

Any ideas?

I think you've probably got half an error there. If as you say it is very thin, you are missing the reverse. The flan will originally have had a lamination fault which was sufficient for it to completely separate. My example of this error is below. There is no impression of a brockage on my coin as the brass 3d is on a considerably thicker flan (though there might be a hint of the back of the head and the crown), but the combination of thin flan and void of indeterminate size would make a brockage-like feature more likely.

Edited July 8, 2011 by Rob

[Red Riley 2]

Just bought a lot of contemporay counterfeits for my George III collection. In it were also a number of later fakes and then this 1974 one penny descriped as: "1974 Penny, split in half giving the appearance of a brockage."

Now the flan is very thin 0.69-0.76 mm (rim 0.86-1.19 mm), but the raised rim and ghost impression on reverse seems to indicate that it's not simply a split coin? Also the raised rim on obverse is high and sharp on the lower half of the coin.

Any ideas?

I think you've probably got half an error there. If as you say it is very thin, you are missing the reverse. The flan will originally have had a lamination fault which was sufficient for it to completely separate. My example of this error is below. There is no impression of a brockage on my coin as the brass 3d is on a considerably thicker flan (though there might be a hint of the back of the head and the crown), but the combination of thin flan and void of indeterminate size would make a brockage-like feature more likely.

I would concur with that. The usual way of obliterating one side or the other is to put it on a lathe which leaves similar marks to the grooves on an LP record.

[seuk 85]

Thanks! Think I understand it better now

[Cerbera100 0]

A nice little error there... would be fun to know where the other half was and reunite them! In my personal opinion, the ghosting on the 'reverse' is just that... just like good old GeorgeV pennies!

If you are interested in finding a new home for it, drop me a PM