Mint Error or Damaged? Decoding the Surface of New Purchase 1870 2 Cent Piece PCGS MS65BN CAC Pop 2 0 Higher

Introduction: The Surface Tells the Story

Is that a rare lamination flaw, or did someone take a screwdriver to it? Let’s break down how to tell the difference.

When I first saw the images of this stunning 1870 2 Cent Piece—graded PCGS MS65+BN with CAC approval and a population of just 2 with none higher—I knew this coin deserved more than a casual glance. After years of grading and attributing errors across thousands of copper and bronze issues, I can tell you that the 1870 2 Cent Piece presents a fascinating case study in surface analysis. The forum community was rightfully excited about this acquisition, but as someone who spends his days deciphering every scratch, flake, and discoloration on a coin’s face, I see an opportunity to dig deeper into what makes this coin’s surfaces so remarkable—and how to distinguish genuine minting phenomena from post-mint damage.

The 1870 2 Cent Piece represents a pivotal moment in American numismatic history. Struck during the post-Civil War era, these large bronze coins were among the first to bear the motto “IN GOD WE TRUST.” With a composition of 95% copper and 5% tin and zinc, the planchets used in their production were susceptible to specific types of manufacturing flaws that collectors prize today. But they were also vulnerable to damage after leaving the mint, making the distinction between error and damage absolutely critical for proper valuation.

Understanding the 1870 2 Cent Piece: Historical Context

The Series and Its Significance

The 2 Cent Piece series was authorized by the Act of April 22, 1864, making it one of the shortest-lived denominations in U.S. coinage history. Production continued until 1873, with the 1870 issue representing a middle date in the series. The Philadelphia Mint struck these coins in relatively modest numbers compared to other denominations, and survival rates in high Mint State grades are remarkably low.

What makes the 1870 date particularly interesting from an error attribution standpoint is the state of minting technology during this period. The Philadelphia Mint was still refining its planchet preparation processes, and the bronze composition—while an improvement over the earlier copper-nickel issues—presented its own challenges in terms of lamination and surface quality.

Why This Grade Matters

A PCGS MS65+BN grade with CAC approval places this coin in elite territory. The “BN” designation indicates Brown, meaning the coin has significant original color remaining but has toned to a predominantly brown appearance. The “+” modifier from PCGS indicates that the coin sits at the upper end of the MS65 grade, approaching MS66 quality. With a population of just 2 and none higher, this represents one of the finest known examples of the date.

In my experience, coins at this grade level demand meticulous surface examination. Every mark, every irregularity, every discoloration must be evaluated for origin. Is it a mint-made error? Is it post-mint damage? Or is it simply the natural result of storage and handling over 150+ years?

Lamination Errors: The Mint’s Signature Flaw

What Are Lamination Errors?

Lamination errors occur when impurities, gas pockets, or structural weaknesses within the metal planchet cause layers of the coin’s surface to separate or flake away during the striking process. These are genuine mint errors—they occur at the moment of creation and are pressed into the coin by the dies themselves.

For the 1870 2 Cent Piece, lamination errors are particularly relevant because of the bronze composition. The 95% copper, 5% tin and zinc alloy was rolled into strips from which planchets were punched. If the rolling process didn’t fully consolidate the metal, or if impurities were present in the alloy, the resulting planchets could develop internal weaknesses that would manifest as lamination during striking.

Identifying Genuine Lamination

When I examine a coin for potential lamination errors, I look for several key characteristics:

• Edge Definition: Genuine lamination typically shows a gradual, irregular edge where the metal has separated. The boundary between the intact surface and the laminated area is usually smooth and follows the natural contours of the metal’s internal structure.
• Surface Texture: The area beneath a lamination flake often shows a different texture than the surrounding surface. It may appear slightly rougher or more porous, reflecting the exposed interior of the planchet.
• Strike Quality: Lamination errors often affect the strike in predictable ways. The laminated area may show weaker detail because the die couldn’t fully impress into the compromised metal.
• Toning Patterns: Genuine lamination will show consistent toning with the surrounding surface, as both areas were exposed to the same environmental conditions simultaneously.

Lamination on the 1870 2 Cent Piece

On this particular coin, the forum images suggest clean, problem-free surfaces—which is exactly what we’d expect for an MS65+BN grade. However, the absence of visible lamination doesn’t mean we shouldn’t understand what to look for. Many collectors mistake minor laminations for post-mint damage, potentially undervaluing coins that actually carry genuine mint errors.

The 1870 2 Cent Piece, being a bronze issue, is more susceptible to lamination than later issues where minting technology had improved. When lamination does appear on these coins, it typically manifests as small flakes or peeling on the high points of the design—particularly on the shield and the “IN GOD WE TRUST” ribbon.

Clipped Planchets: Another Mint-Made Phenomenon

The Mechanics of Clipped Planchets

Clipped planchets occur when the punching mechanism that cuts planchets from the metal strip overlaps a previously punched area or the edge of the strip. This results in a crescent-shaped missing section on the finished coin. Clipped planchets are among the most recognizable and collectible mint errors.

For the 1870 2 Cent Piece, clipped planchets would have been produced on the same bronze strips used for other denominations. The large size of the 2 Cent Piece planchet (23mm diameter) meant that the strip had to be wide enough to accommodate it, and any misalignment in the punching process could result in clips.

Distinguishing Clips from Post-Mint Damage

The distinction between a genuine clipped planchet and post-mint damage that mimics a clip is crucial. Here’s what I look for:

1. Metal Flow: On a genuine clip, the metal around the clipped area will show evidence of flow toward the missing section. This is because the dies compressed the planchet during striking, and the metal moved to fill the available space.
2. Uniformity: Genuine clips typically show a smooth, curved edge that matches the diameter of the punching die. Post-mint damage that creates a similar appearance usually shows irregular, jagged edges.
3. Strike Continuation: On a clipped planchet, the design will continue smoothly up to the edge of the clip and then stop abruptly. Post-mint damage may show design elements that appear to “wrap around” the damaged area unnaturally.
4. Weight: A genuine clipped planchet will weigh less than a standard planchet. For the 1870 2 Cent Piece, the standard weight is 6.22 grams. A clipped example would weigh noticeably less.

Clipped Planchets in the 2 Cent Series

While clipped planchets are not common on 1870 2 Cent Pieces, they do exist and are highly sought after by error collectors. The combination of a clipped planchet with the MS65+BN grade of this coin would be extraordinary—though based on the forum images, this particular example appears to be a full, round planchet.

Post-Mint Damage: The Collector’s Nemesis

Understanding PMD

Post-mint damage (PMD) refers to any alteration or damage that occurs to a coin after it has left the mint. This includes scratches, dents, cleaning, tooling, and environmental damage. PMD is the bane of collectors and graders alike, as it can significantly reduce a coin’s numismatic value and collectibility.

For high-grade coins like this 1870 2 Cent Piece, even minor PMD can be devastating to value. A coin that might otherwise grade MS65 could be reduced to MS60 or lower by a single well-placed scratch or a small area of tooling.

Common Types of PMD on Copper and Bronze Coins

Copper and bronze coins are particularly susceptible to certain types of PMD:

• Cleaning Marks: Harsh cleaning leaves distinctive parallel scratches that are visible under magnification. On bronze coins, cleaning often removes the original patina, leaving the surface with an unnatural, uniform appearance.
• Tooling Marks: Tooling occurs when someone attempts to alter a coin’s appearance—perhaps to remove a contact mark or to enhance detail. Tooling marks typically show as small, circular scratches or areas of disturbed metal.
• Environmental Damage: Exposure to moisture, chemicals, or extreme temperatures can cause corrosion, pitting, or discoloration. Bronze coins are particularly vulnerable to bronze disease, a form of corrosion that can destroy a coin’s surface.
• Contact Marks: While minor contact marks are expected on circulated coins, heavy contact marks on Mint State examples can significantly impact grade and eye appeal.

Identifying PMD on the 1870 2 Cent Piece

When I examine a high-grade 1870 2 Cent Piece, I pay particular attention to several areas where PMD is most likely to occur:

1. The Shield: The vertical lines of the shield are prone to contact marks and cleaning scratches. Any disturbance to these lines is immediately visible and can significantly impact grade.
2. The “IN GOD WE TRUST” Ribbon: The raised lettering on the ribbon is susceptible to wear and damage. Tooling attempts often target this area to enhance the appearance of weak strikes.
3. The Fields: The flat areas around the design elements should be smooth and free of marks. Any scratches, digs, or disturbances in the fields are red flags for PMD.
4. The Rim: The rim is often the first area to show signs of mishandling. Dents, nicks, and tooling marks on the rim can indicate that the coin has been improperly stored or handled.

Tooling Marks: The Deceptive Alteration

What Are Tooling Marks?

Tooling marks are a specific type of PMD that occurs when someone physically alters a coin’s surface using a tool—whether a dental pick, a small engraver, or even a sharp piece of metal. The goal of tooling is typically to remove contact marks, enhance detail, or create the appearance of a higher grade.

Tooling marks are particularly insidious because they can be difficult to detect without proper magnification and lighting. An experienced grader or error attribution expert can usually identify tooling by looking for:

• Disrupted Metal Flow: Tooling disturbs the natural metal flow created during striking. Under magnification, tooled areas show chaotic, multidirectional striations that contrast with the uniform flow lines of an untouched surface.
• Altered Toning: Tooling removes the original patina and exposes fresh metal. This creates a color mismatch that is visible even to the naked eye on high-grade coins.
• Geometric Patterns: Tooling often creates small, circular, or linear patterns that don’t match the natural wear patterns of a coin.

Tooling on the 1870 2 Cent Piece

On this particular coin, the PCGS MS65+BN grade and CAC approval provide strong evidence that tooling is not present. PCGS and CAC both have strict policies against tooling, and coins with evidence of tooling are typically rejected or labeled as “damaged” rather than assigned a numerical grade.

However, understanding tooling marks is essential for collectors who may encounter similar coins at shows, auctions, or in private transactions. The 1870 2 Cent Piece, with its large size and detailed design, is a prime target for tooling attempts—particularly on the shield and lettering.

The Intersection of Error and Damage: A Case Study

When Errors Mimic Damage

One of the most challenging aspects of error attribution is distinguishing genuine mint errors from post-mint damage that mimics errors. This is particularly true for lamination errors, which can sometimes be confused with scratches or gouges.

In my experience, the key to making this distinction lies in understanding the physics of how each type of mark is created. Lamination occurs when metal separates along internal planes—the resulting mark has depth, irregular edges, and often shows exposed metal beneath the surface. Scratches and gouges, on the other hand, are created by external forces and show V-shaped cross-sections with sharp, defined edges.

When Damage Mimics Errors

Conversely, some types of post-mint damage can mimic genuine errors. A coin that has been improperly cleaned may show a uniform, matte appearance that resembles a planchet flaw. A coin that has been stored in a drawer with other coins may show linear scratches that resemble adjustment marks.

The 1870 2 Cent Piece is particularly susceptible to this confusion because of its large, flat fields. Any disturbance to these fields is immediately visible and can be difficult to attribute without careful examination.

Practical Tips for Collectors

Before You Buy

If you’re considering purchasing a high-grade 1870 2 Cent Piece—or any coin where surface quality is critical—here are my recommendations:

1. Examine Under Proper Lighting: Use a single, focused light source at a low angle to the coin’s surface. This will reveal scratches, tooling marks, and other surface disturbances that are invisible under normal lighting.
2. Use Magnification: A 5x to 10x loupe is essential for examining surface quality. For tooling marks and fine scratches, even higher magnification may be necessary.
3. Check the Edges: The edge of a coin can reveal a lot about its provenance and history. Look for signs of reeding damage, edge dents, or other disturbances that might indicate post-mint damage.
4. Compare to Known Examples: If possible, compare the coin to other examples of the same date and grade. This will help you develop a sense of what “normal” looks like for the issue.
5. Trust Reputable Graders: Coins graded by PCGS, NGC, or other reputable services have been examined by multiple experts. While no grading service is perfect, their assessments provide a baseline for surface quality.

After You Buy

Once you’ve acquired a high-grade coin, proper storage and handling are essential to preserving its surface quality and luster:

• Use Proper Holders: Store coins in inert, non-PVC holders that protect against environmental damage and physical contact.
• Handle with Care: Always hold coins by the edges, and avoid touching the surfaces. Even clean fingers can leave oils that accelerate toning and corrosion.
• Control the Environment: Store coins in a cool, dry environment with stable temperature and humidity. Avoid basements, attics, and other areas with extreme conditions.
• Document the Coin: Take high-resolution photographs of your coin from multiple angles. This creates a record of the coin’s condition at the time of acquisition and can help identify any future damage.

The Value of Expert Attribution

Why It Matters

For a coin like this 1870 2 Cent Piece—with its PCGS MS65+BN grade, CAC approval, and population of 2 with none higher—the distinction between error and damage can mean thousands of dollars in value. A coin with a genuine lamination error might command a premium from error collectors, while a coin with post-mint damage might be worth significantly less than its grade would suggest.

This is why expert attribution is so important. An experienced error attribution expert can examine a coin and determine the origin of every mark on its surface. This information is invaluable for buyers, sellers, and collectors who want to make informed decisions about their numismatic investments.

The Role of Third-Party Graders

Third-party grading services like PCGS and NGC play a crucial role in the attribution process. Their graders are trained to identify post-mint damage and to reject coins that show evidence of alteration. The CAC sticker, which indicates that a coin meets certain quality standards within its assigned grade, provides an additional layer of assurance.

However, even the best grading services can make mistakes. This is why I always recommend that collectors develop their own skills in surface examination and error attribution. The more you know about what to look for, the better equipped you’ll be to evaluate coins on your own.

Conclusion: The Enduring Appeal of the 1870 2 Cent Piece

The 1870 2 Cent Piece represents a fascinating chapter in American numismatic history. Its large size, distinctive design, and historical significance make it a favorite among collectors of copper and bronze coinage. The example discussed here—graded PCGS MS65+BN with CAC approval and a population of just 2 with none higher—is a truly exceptional coin that exemplifies the best of what the series has to offer.

As an error attribution expert, I’m always drawn to the stories that coins tell through their surfaces. Every mark, every discoloration, every irregularity is a clue to the coin’s history—from the moment it was struck at the Philadelphia Mint to the present day. Understanding these clues is what makes coin collecting such a rewarding pursuit.

For collectors interested in the 1870 2 Cent Piece, my advice is simple: learn to read the surface. Understand the difference between lamination errors and post-mint damage. Recognize tooling marks and other forms of alteration. And above all, appreciate the beauty and history of these remarkable coins.

The forum community was right to celebrate this acquisition. It’s a coin that deserves admiration—not just for its grade and rarity, but for the story it tells about American minting history and the enduring appeal of numismatic excellence. Whether you’re building a complete MS CAC set or simply adding a few key dates to your collection, the 1870 2 Cent Piece is a coin that will always hold a special place in the hearts of collectors.

As with all high-grade numismatic purchases, due diligence is paramount. Have your coins examined by experts, understand the nuances of surface attribution, and never stop learning. The world of mint errors and post-mint damage is complex and ever-evolving—but for those willing to invest the time and effort, the rewards are immeasurable.

Related Resources

You might also find these related articles helpful:

• Spotting the Difference: Proof vs. Business Strike in Seated Liberty Dollars – Introduction: The Deceptive Mirror of Early Proof Coinage Sometimes early proof coins look like business strikes, and vi…
• Verdigris and PVC: Saving Your 1870 2 Cent Piece PCGS MS65+BN CAC Pop 2 0 Higher from Environmental Damage – Introduction: The Silent Threat to Your Numismatic Treasures Improper storage is the enemy of numismatics—and I’ve…
• Mint Error or Damaged? Decoding the Surface of Your Seated Liberty Dollar: A Guide to Planchet Flaws vs. Post-Mint Damage – Introduction: The Surface Tells the Story Is that a rare lamination flaw, or did someone just scratch it with a screwdri…