| Author |
 Replies: 19 / Views: 923 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 Canada
18272 Posts |
We really need pictures, not a video.
Also the weight should be to two decimal points, not one.
With the +- tolerance, it is pretty close to the accepted weight.
|
|
New Member
Topic StarterUnited States
8 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
930 Posts |
Likely worn down enough to lose approximately 0.2 grams, down from around 3.1 grams originally. That's about a 6 to 7% loss.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
81585 Posts |
Considering the wear, within tolerance.  to the CCF! Edited by Coinfrog
03/25/2023 6:07 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4388 Posts |
to the CCF and  Also might have started out a little light.
|
|
New Member
Topic StarterUnited States
8 Posts |
If the coin was not worn, what would be your opinion?
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
22519 Posts |
Can you post up an image of the edge of the coin - sided by side with a normal weight cent?
|
|
New Member
Topic StarterUnited States
8 Posts |
This is the 1944 S 2.9 beside 1977 3.1  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2362 Posts |
My wild guess here would be about $2.00 in value. It would be an ok "filler" coin for a set. Like I said, this is just a wild guess. I have many, many older cents with little value. I don't see anything on the coin that would raise it's value.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1355 Posts |
If it's underweight at all it is so little that it wouldn't add any interest or value.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10170 Posts |
2.98 grams was the minimum coming out of the mint. 2.9 is completely normal given the level of wear. 1944 to 1946 cents were 95% Cu and 5% Zn (shell case brass). Same tolerance for weight.
It's worth 5 cents maybe.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
81585 Posts |
Wear could account for the difference, or maybe it was just a light planchet to start. It happens.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
5730 Posts |
The weight for this coin is normal. BH was faster then me to answer. It is normal to be under weight due to the heavy circulation. The CU-Zn alloy it is an relative soft metal resistant to abrasions.
Never argue with an idiot. First they will drag you down to their level. Then, they will beat you with experience. (MARK TWAIN)
|
|
New Member
Topic StarterUnited States
8 Posts |
Is bronze 2.5% lighter than brass?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
5730 Posts |
Quote:
Brass is an alloy containing Zinc as the principal alloying element with or without other designated alloys such as Tin, Aluminum, Nickel, and Lead . By Comparison Bronze is principally an alloy of Copper and Tin. Bronze does not necessarily contain Tin, and a variety of alloys of Copper, including alloys with Iron, Phosphorus, Lead, Aluminum, Manganese, and Silicon are commonly termed Bronze. In fact all are Brass in metallurgy. the name bronze come from anticity and still be use today. Tin and Zinc at 5% as alloying elements do not change the weight for the coins at 19 mm diameter and this tightness. The reason for change from the 95% cooper, 5% zinc and tin in 1962 to 95% cooper and 5% zinc, was not just the price of the tin but also of the elasticity proprieties of the alloy. Just analyze that all the cents from 1909 till now has max. 3.11gr and min. 2.98 gr mint acceptable weight.
Never argue with an idiot. First they will drag you down to their level. Then, they will beat you with experience. (MARK TWAIN)
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 19 / Views: 923 |
|
Posted 03/25/2023 5:49 pm
