| Author |
 Replies: 11 / Views: 30,969 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
90 Posts |
Alright, while I was at work today, I found an oddity in a roll of quarters, it is a 1966 quarter, that appears to be made entirely out of copper. It looks very much like an old penny, and has that coppery sheen to it. If you look at it from the side, instead of seeing the normal sandwich of nickel and copper, it's just copper, with no separation what-so-ever.
I was really excited to find something like this... until I found another one in the same roll, a 1987 P quarter, with the same properties as the former... It seemed like a sure thing when I found the first one, but having found a second, and in the same roll, makes me doubt if it is really as it appears... Ideas? Opinions?
I'll post some pictures as soon as I can get my scanner to work.
|
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
6563 Posts |
2 quarters from the same roll from 2 different dates. Sounds like someone was messing around with some chemistry and then gave up and took em to the bank.
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
90 Posts |
Yeah... that's kind of what I was thinking... One has a possibility... but two? I suppose it's also possible, that someone just unknowingly cashed in someones coin collection... I've had my sister accidently spend my silver quarters before... So, it does happen... but, I'm skeptical.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6381 Posts |
Hi Fenrir, Here's my NGC-certified, missing-clad-layer quarter (I've posted this before). It came from a vending machine and it weighed about 1 gram less than the standard weight for a clad quarter, which is 5.67 grams. Only the obverse clad layer is missing. If you actually have a double no-clad error, it should weigh at least 2 grams light. With that much metal missing I would expect it to have a very soft strike, since there would not have been enough metal to fill the die properly. Note that the surface of the 1979-D coin is smooth. If your coins are acid-treated alterations, the surfaces will probably be rough and porous. If they had been soaked in acid long enough to remove all the copper-nickel cladding, the edge reeding should also have been mostly dissolved away. Please post some photos if you can; it could be educational!  |
|
Valued Member
United States
90 Posts |
Okay, here are the pictures... though, for some reason... the copper-look really doesn't show up very well on it. The 1966 (on the left) looks much more copper-ish than the '87... but neither of them seems to have any layers on the edge as you can see if you look closely. For those who may wonder, I stuck the quarters in the pages of a book to get them to be able to scan... as none of my digital cameras are very usefull. They are the same thickness as a normal quarter though... I don't have an accurate means of weighing them atm... though I'm sure I could find somewhere to check it.  Edited by Midnight Fenrir
02/28/2008 10:42 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3507 Posts |
Those were both buried. They were lost and then years later found by someone with a metal detector. The soil conditions changed the colors.
Only a guess as far as the location, but I am thinking the northeastern U.S. Thats what they used to look like when I would find them buried in NY or PA. Definitely , they were underground for awhile.
Thanks,
Bill
Edited by foundinrolls
02/29/2008 12:05 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
527 Posts |
I agree, it looks like someone is cashing in their metal detecting finds.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
90 Posts |
Hmm... that makes sense to me... the '66 seems to have almost no silver toning to it what-so-ever... but since it's older, maybe it's just been in the ground longer... Either way, they're staying in my collection, they're very unique looking, and quite beautiful really. Is there anything good I can do to check? All I can think of is to weigh it, or maybe test it's electrical resistance?
Edited by Midnight Fenrir
02/29/2008 03:22 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7629 Posts |
Any time you find a discolored coin, pay close attention to the texture of the surface. If it's not right, you probably either have a coin that has a post-mint removed layer, or a post-mint added layer. The texture of the coin is the important part here, and what immediately signals your coins as having damage...in this case corrosion from the ground.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2177 Posts |
Would there be a weight difference if this coin were copper? I'm not suggesting that this quarter is copper or not. I'm just curious.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
237 Posts |
A copper quarter should be heavier than a regular one I'd think.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
90 Posts |
quote:
Any time you find a discolored coin, pay close attention to the texture of the surface. If it's not right, you probably either have a coin that has a post-mint removed layer, or a post-mint added layer. The texture of the coin is the important part here, and what immediately signals your coins as having damage...in this case corrosion from the ground.
Well, the '87 has almost no visible corrosion, it's bright and shiny. Though it's not quite as coppery looking... Maybe bronze colored? It's kind of a washed-out copper look... Are the outer clad layers of quarters cupric nickel as well, or just plain nickel? I could easily see this as slightly too high of a concentration of copper in the metal. Burried in the ground sounds suitable for the '66... it's surface is rather marred, and unsmooth... On both coins, the rims are very bright and shiny, new-penny shiny. And I've looked at them with a high-powered magnifying lens and I cannot see any layers... You can see it pretty well in the pictures on that note. |
| |
Replies: 11 / Views: 30,969 |
|
Posted 02/28/2008 9:41 pm
