A wheat penny will lie in a jar fifty years and still be read as trash in the pocket. However, the Lincoln Wheat cent which was minted between 1909 and 1958 is a series on which minute, almost imperceptible details are regularly altered to alter what the coin becomes, according to the collector, in fact.
The majority of wheat cents are humble in a battered state and that fact is a discipline of the hobby. Close observation is not granted, but must be achieved, and the best of such keepers are those who proclaim themselves by way of a brief list of repeatable indications: a controversial design element, a single below-date letter, an incorrect metal to the year, or doubling of that which is like the coin having slipped temporarily out of position with the coin.
1. The 1909 initials that sparked a redesign
Lincoln cent, designed in 1909 by Victor David Brenner, was released in 1909 and the first year of issue has one little controversy to it: the initials of the designer, V.D.B., were placed too large on the reverse before they were taken off. That rapid transition formed a well-defined initial subset of coins which numerous collectors will seclude instantly, without a second thought of grade. The best known of these is the 1909-S VDB a San Francisco issue of 484,000. It was also popular making it one of the most assailed coins to be changed, and this is why authentication guides focus more on diagnostics including the fact that only four obverse dies were used to serve genuine examples.
2. The mintmark under the date that changes everything
The tiniest letter may be the loudest sign on the wheat pennies. The occurrence (or lack of) D or S under the date can turn a coin into an abundant one or one that is rightfully of short supply, particularly in years where one of the branches of the mint made considerably fewer cents than Philadelphia. Certain coins such as the 1914-D and 1931-S are continually re-pulled as second-look coins, as they are at the boundary of collector demand and reduced production. It is there too that most of the misleading changes take place, and mintmarks added or changed to give the impression of a more desirable date. The fact that the Philadelphia cents were traditionally of the type were not marked on this series with any mint mark is useful in maintaining a simple sort, based on the way the Mint actually worked.
3. The “missing D” that is really a Denver story
There are not many puzzles with wheat-based as the 1922 “No D.” is famous. This coin seems to be, on the face of it, a Philadelphia cent, as it does not bear a mintmark, but the type is of Denver manufacture, where the mintmark is missing. That is the combination a mistake on a coin already in a key-date neighborhood that makes it still a headline kind of the series. It also gives the reason why the coin should be scrutinized with a keen eye: weak hits, weariness, and surface scratches may pass on the illusion of missing details that were never missing in the first place.
4. The 1943 steel year (and the magnet test that starts the conversation)
Cent years are easiest to find with 1943 being the easiest year to find and the coins being struck in zinc-coated steel and tend to look silvery or grey. It is not uncommon to have the steel problem, but it preconditions the more familiar rarity: few 1943-dated cents minted upon unused copper planchets. The fast screening is feasible in this case since steel will be attracted to a magnet whereas copper will not and that suspected copper will receive a weight of approximately 3.11 grams. With that said, plate and modified dates are common pitfalls; therefore, non-magnetic is merely a starting point and not an endpoint.
5. The 1944 steel mistake that looks wrong on purpose
As cents were reintroduced to copper in 1944, few of them were minted on steel planchets, which continued to be used. The call is direct: a 1944 cent made of wheat which looks like steel-gray to the touch. What makes the coin interesting is the same clarity which makes it susceptible the aberrant hue may be gained by plating, by exposure in the environment, or by artificial means. To the collector, the clue of keeper is not that it looks like silver, but that there is physical evidence and professional attestation to show that it is silver.
6. Doubled dies that can be seen without special equipment
All keepers are not necessarily reliant on metal. The importance of some cent coinage of wheat is due to the varieties of the die that give rise to dramatic doubling up of lettering and figures. The most commonly known public icon is the 1955 Doubled Die Obverse, in which the inscriptions and the date are doubled with bold fonts which can be easily viewed in regular light, with or without magnification.
The 1958 Doubled Die Obverse is much rarer confirmed and has received an unusual level of focus at the highest tier of the market, with an auction record of $336,000. Simple advice, never overlooked in daily searching, is that viability doubling on important inscriptions is something to halt and investigate, whereas random appearing distortion is more likely to be damage.
7. Condition signals that upgrade “common” into collectible
There are a lot of wheat pennies, and the date of these coins is not the date of the preservation of the coin. The sharpness, which collectors seem to watch, Lincoln hair, clean fields, sharp wheat lines, are worn away, scratched, and faded into dull surfaces. A good date, which has good detail remaining, may be more interesting than a good date that is highly impaired, particularly to collectors who are constructing matched sets. This is also where novice collectors take a valuable lesson, by cleaning, polishing or brightening a cent, they can forever alter the surface, and flatten the interest in the coin. Keeping on the move is commonly restraint, less to do, more to be deposited and more to be normalised by an expert when a coin is really worth it.
Learning all those rare dates is not the most helpful skill of the wheat-penny. It is learning that it is always the minor hints that are sure causes to slow down: a first-year design detail, an unexpected mintmark, a metal expected to pass a quick test but fails, or doubling that is not accidental but deliberate. In the case of most jars the consequence is a few small premiums and a better understanding of the way history presents itself in small items. With the outlier here and there it comes to be a keeper on a much narrower ground than because it is old.
