Let's Do The Twist Again

The concept of a cleaned coin is a mystery to me. Sure, when a coin looks like somebody scrubbed it with steel wool, as it appears the coin in the first post is, it's easy to tell. However, I have two or three silver coins that I believe have been "dipped" and/or polished because they show significant wear but they are shiny - not lustrous with axial cartwheels, etc., but shiny like stainless steel. I think it's Fred who has written more than once here that cleaning does not effect a coin's grade. I'm not sure I agree with that. (If it's not you, Fred, please forgive me if you're reading this!) The coins I'm referring to have negative eye-appeal precisely because there is wear without any dirt or grime whatsoever. The shine looks fake to me, so I find it disturbing to look very long at those coins.

And I want to bake some coins too!! Somewhere I read that people have actually placed coins inside potatoes and baked them! If I ever get so affluent as to have extra silver or gold coins to monkey around with, I'd be interested to see how that works! (Actually, I can't imagine deliberately damaging anything made of gold.)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stephen420

The concept of a cleaned coin is a mystery to me. Sure, when a coin looks like somebody scrubbed it with steel wool, as it appears the coin in the first post is, it's easy to tell. However, I have two or three silver coins that I believe have been "dipped" and/or polished because they show significant wear but they are shiny - not lustrous with axial cartwheels, etc., but shiny like stainless steel. I think it's Fred who has written more than once here that cleaning does not effect a coin's grade. I'm not sure I agree with that. (If it's not you, Fred, please forgive me if you're reading this!) The coins I'm referring to have negative eye-appeal precisely because there is wear without any dirt or grime whatsoever. The shine looks fake to me, so I find it disturbing to look very long at those coins.

---

There are a couple of different thoughts on this. For instance, a coin that started as UNC cannot be considered UNC after a cleaning. At that point, in my opinion anyway, it immediately changes to AU (at best). A truly bad, rough cleaning could cause enough wear to lower it to VF/EF. The rubbing involved causes wear.

Dips remove or change a layer metal on the coin, therefore causing more wear than the coin prior to the cleaning. This also needs to be taken into consideration.

Have I seen cleaned coins whose grades did not change due to the cleaning? Yes. Acetone baths (in my opinion) do not change the coin's grade because it doesn't change the composition of the metal. Old copper coins were often cleaned with olive oil. This also does not change the metal so I don't consider these coins to have lower grades.

I think this is something that needs to be considered on a case-by-case basis.

It may have been a planchet flaw. I don't think NGC specifies errors unless requested by the submitter.

Not necessarily. If the planchet was defective going into the cutter, the portion that's missing on the edge could have been very weak and broken off prior to stamping (or even during the stamping process). It may not have been overlaid.

I guess we'll never know exactly what happened. If it was post-mint damage, though, NGC would have bodybagged it. They bodybag anything questionable.

I just looked at it again, and boy do I feel stupid. You are right. It is the holder. If you look close, you can see that the white area is raised. I would think this is due to the shape of the coin under it. Thanks for pointing that out. Should have seen it the first time.

I have seen a number of TPG slabs with the holes not punched correctly. You would think that, for the money they charge, they could at least make sure that the presentation is nice. I have also seen quite a number that are seated crooked in the slabs. Not much quality control going on anymore I guess.