Help to explain this lam error.

[JRocco]

What a cool coin. Major lamination error that appears to have left a deep gouge on this coin, yet there is still the design features. This coin still shows an S mint mark that is well below the surface of the coin. I will show a different angle pic also to show how deep this gouge is. Most of the 9 is also well below the surface level of the field.
http://forums.collectors.com/include/uploadbox/viewfile.cfm?files=40slam%2Ejpg http://forums.collectors.com/include/uploadbox/viewfile.cfm?files=40slamview%2Ejpg

[JRocco]

Here is a set of close-ups taken with a QX3, they help to show how deep the lam really is.
http://forums.collectors.com/include/uploadbox/viewfile.cfm?files=40slampand%2Ejpg

[coppercoins]

Lamination peels usually occur after the strike. Since the coin was struck with the metal in place, then peeled off after the strike, you can see the mintmark through the peel - not at all unusual.

The mintmark is an absence of strike, a recess in the die that lets the metal flow upward. What you're seeing is the base - the foundation of the raised area.

[murphy]

That's a nice lamination error. I've seen a few photos of them around here-n-there, but I was able to find one while searching through rolls of circulated cents about a year ago. And it does seem strange at first to see the date is carried through despite the lam error. The strike definitely goes through the lamination layer and beyond. Here's photos of my find: