1944-S Mint Mark ID

[N-6166]

I haven’t posted a question before, and I need help on a 1944 S Lincoln. It isn’t in great shape because it apparently was stored between two 1943’s and they damaged it some. However, the “S” is the question. The photos attached cover the front, back, date area, the mint mark and a pasted side by side o both MMS-003 and MMS-005. The MMS-003 was supposedly only used in 1928 and 1944 used only the 005 or 006. Sorry about the color, my camera uses LED’s and it is hard to eliminate glare and color variations.

[occnumis2021]

so what is it that makes you think that your coin has the 1928 large S as oppose to the 1944 large S punch?

i know the technicalities about large s having straight serifs and the 1944 punch having straight serifs and not being called the large s although it MAY be on some other coins/denoms? it takes a little study across a few series to untangle it.

to confuse matters even tho it doesn't apply here, the trumpet tail is also called a large S on some coins. go figure.

i'll just post this here for convenience and posterity.

http://varietyvista.com/25%20What%20...k%20Styles.htm

https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1944-s-1c-rd/2731

[MintErrors]

You mint mark is flat compared to the 1928 mintmark.that cam make it appear wider. Why is the coin you have a flatter date and mintmark? It's an extremely work die.one that has probably struck hundreds of thousands of coins. It is probably die deterioration related.

I highly doubt they would have had a steel rod punch laying around for 16 or more years and randomly used on the single working die. And a rare one at that. The date looks thicker, as does the mint mark. It could have been an over heated planchet, struck just as hard like the others, giving it that thickness look.

That variety vista link is the best reference for this. Even if it was a different mintmark punch, i do not believe you would become rich because of it. In my decades of experience in this field, I personally have never sold, bought, seen nor have I been asked for a wrong mintmark type.... minus maybe....Morgan Dollar VAMs.

[N-6166]

Thank you for your response. You’ll note the coin is a well circulated coin with ware and the photo with the two pasted images of the 003 and 005 style “S” pasted on each side of the coins date area are taken from Variety Vista website you referenced. The reason I posted this question was to an untrained eye like mine, the center “S” in the photo looks more like the 003 S. If it was an 005 S, just worn, the two thin areas of the die should also excessively worn. As you say, it does take a lot of study and a great deal of investigation to determine the facts on what and why the differences are and that is why I posted the question because I don’t have that education. It is true that the value of this coin is most likely not worth the investment in the time nor money to arrive at an accurate conclusion of what die was used, however I still desire to be accurate.

[N-6166]

I have searched everywhere in print and on line without finding an answer to the MM question. I have also obtained a scale and find something very unusual about this coin. I have checked it’s dimensions which are in spec however, it’s weight is wrong. It should be close to 3.11g but it is only 2.9061g. It also is not steel because it is not attracted to a magnet. Can anyone point me in the right direction with this coin?

[MintErrors]

Its within tolerance for a Lincoln Cent weight.
Copper cents have a tolerance of +/- 0.13 grams.
If it is off just a tad, its a slightly underweight planchet, nothing too significant.

Other than that. I have nothing else to add.