| Author |
 Replies: 88 / Views: 6,044 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
5672 Posts |
The fact that NGC got 40% silver and your local company got 80% silver means that one of them (or possibly both) is inaccurate. I think you need another test at a different facility.
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
67 Posts |
Thanks Dearborn. I'm checking other places in the area to see if I can get a second xrf scan. I'll keep this thread posted if I get new results or hear back from NGC.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
67 Posts |
Zurie, this is true at least one is wrong. The fact that 9% of the NGC report is left off and NGC is ghosting me on a response for almost a week makes me suspect theirs is off. It's possible I can get their report authenticated as an error once this is all said and done &  . Also with the gold scope xrf machine the guy put his 14k gold ring in first and it scanned it correctly before we scanned the coin so I don't have reason to suspect it at this time other than any potential plastic holder interference though I don't see how it would detect silver/copper but no manganese if the plastic was interfering at all. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2281 Posts |
You realize when you know how to think, it empowers you far beyond those who know only what to think.
-Neil deGrasse Tyson
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1502 Posts |
I suspect it is a common War Nickel too - potentially with an improperly mixed alloy as I mentioned on the first page. Did the more recent XRF include a full spectrum analysis? I would inquire as to how it was calibrated. XRF will not just perform a full spectrum analysis by default. In fact, some of the cheaper units are scenario specific and cannot be calibrated beyond whatever the factory set. What I'm getting at is this. If it was not calibrated to look for Mn, it will not report on Mn. But it must report 100% so the software that produces your report will usually lump the 'unknowns' into a reported category. I'll bet the NGC report is the more viable. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1502 Posts |
Thinking about it a bit further, just grab a common War Nickel w/o slab and take that into your local shop. See how that reports. I swing a metal detector and have a knack for finding dirty old coins. Dirt coin restoration projects - https://www.prodetecting.com/restorationsDirt coin restoration blog - https://www.prodetecting.com/blog/ccawDirt coin dig videos - https://www.youtube.com/@prodetecting |
|
Valued Member
United States
67 Posts |
DOCC yes it tested for 22 elemental metals including Ag Cu and Mn. And it was tested with a goldscope sd510 which is a high end enclosure at the office of a company who sells XRF machines. I spoke to an xrf company in the area who tests coins for Heritage, he knows the company and said the goldscope is a more accurate instrument than his Fischer who I'm looking to get potentially a second scan from.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
573 Posts |
Quote:Something interesting I just found out. They were minting Ethiopian 50 cent coins in Philadelphia in 1944 which were 80% silver 20% copper though the size of those coins don't match. Is it possible they were melting Ethiopian planchets down and making War Nickels? Unfortunately, this cannot be the foreign planchet error you mentioned. The 50 Santeem of Ethiopia has reeded edges, is 25 mm in diameter and weighs 7.03 grams, compared to the Jefferson nickel which has smooth edges, is only 21.2 mm in diameter and weighs 5 grams. The 50 Santeem planchet wouldn't fit into the striking chamber for a Jefferson nickel given the very significant size difference, and even if it did, somehow, the resulting coin would weigh 7.03 grams, not +/- 5 grams. Given the lamination error visible on the reverse, an improper alloy mixing in the material is almost a certainty and I, along with the others who have said it already, think your anomalous readings are due to the testing of a small spot of the coin in which the alloy mixture is slightly different and not representative of the actual total alloy percentages of the entire coin. It's much like how my coffee gets sweeter as I get closer to the bottom of the cup because I didn't stir the sugar properly. The total sugar to coffee ratio for the entire cup is one number, but test it at any one particular point and you'll get a different number. |
|
Valued Member
United States
67 Posts |
I mentioned before it would've been the melted metal not the planchet of the Ethiopian coin. They melted the ingots onsite back then, it's possibly they mixed the wrong batch of metal and then made the War Nickels out of the Ethiopian composition. It was roughly 80/20% silver/copper on five different gold scope scans across both the front and back. Again, not disputing that it's improperly alloyed. But both the NGC report and the goldscope tests don't list Manganese which means by default an off-metal error. |
|
Valued Member
United States
67 Posts |
Did a bit of research on how the plastic holder may be attenuating the signal. Silver and copper are heavier elements and more susceptible to attenuation from the plastic. Given that the scans showed 0.0% of the light element manganese, that's a big tell that this coin actually does not contain manganese.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
573 Posts |
Quote:
both the NGC report and the goldscope tests don't list Manganese which means by default an off-metal error. I have to disagree with your logic. Your NGC report did not say no MN, it only said 91% AG and CU. You can't make the leap to no MN simply from it's absence on the report, especially since the report clearly said 9% of the coin is something other than CU and AG. The Goldscope test and your NGC report are also very seriously at odds with each other over the make up of the coin. So much so, in fact that one of them has to be rejected as inaccurate. Which one and why? |
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
10546 Posts |
So NGC tests show 40% Ag but the other test shows 80% Ag but shooting through the plastic holder - now which do you think is more accurate?
|
|
Valued Member
United States
67 Posts |
Marve65,
Considering that they considered 40% silver 51% copper a standard composition, that they failed to list manganese at all on the report and that they are ghosting me on questions I'd say I'm leaning towards the goldscope results at this juncture. But I will try to find another xrf tester in town.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10546 Posts |
Just for "grins and giggles" - some XRF machines do need to be calibrated to detect lower number metals from the periodic table. Their machines may have been calibrated to detect precious metals that have a higher number. Copper is #29 (Cu) and Silver is #47 (Ag) while Manganese is #25 (Mn) which means it is a lighter metal and may not be detected. More things to think about before you keep throwing more money at this nickel. Like someone had stated earlier - take another 44 nickel with you and see what it reads too!
|
|
Valued Member
United States
67 Posts |
Thanks, yes I plan on taking a regular War Nickel as well as a sanity check |
| |
Replies: 88 / Views: 6,044 |
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 01/17/2025 12:15 pm
