Author |
Replies: 11 / Views: 599 |
|
New Member
Canada
10 Posts |
Hey everyone ive got a 1859 coinn here that ive taken some pics off. very different look from the 1901 version I have here. The 1859 I have weighs at 3.8? I'm guessing due to loss of metal, however does it look any different from any other copper version to your professionals? Please see attached pics    
|
|
New Member
Canada
10 Posts |
another pic to show thickness on the 1901. 
|
Moderator

United States
96136 Posts |
 to the Community! Your post was moved to the appropriate forum for the proper attention. 
|
Pillar of the Community

Canada
3423 Posts |
An 1859 should weigh 4.54 g and they were 1/3 thinner than all cents from 1876 and later. It should have a diameter of 2.54 centimeters. When they made them, 100 would weigh exactly 1 pound and 12 strung together was a foot. Your coin does not look like an inch in diameter. The 1901 & '59 should be the same diameter and yours doesn't look like it. Brass or bronze, the dia was 2.54 cm and your weight is way off. Your coin has been in contact with a cleaning agent that has turned it yellowish. If you think it's brass, you will need an XRF, but I wouldn't spend much money to check it .... too many red flags.
|
New Member
Canada
10 Posts |
So, what are your thoughts as to what could have caused the reduction in weight? Also what gives with the thickness? It doesn't appear top have lost any detailing to make me believe it's been ground down over .5g.
Thanks.
|
Pillar of the Community

Canada
3423 Posts |
The 1858 & '59 large cents were 1/3 thinner then the British half-pennies that they were intended to be compared to. They were the same diameter as the half-pennies, so they were struck on the same mint presses in London, but made of 95/4/1 bronze rather than the pure copper of the half-pennies. When Canadian cents were next struck, in 1876, the Canadian cents were exactly the same dimensions as the half-penny, again struck in London or Heaton. As far as the weight, I'd say that it's your scale that's wrong.
|
New Member
Canada
10 Posts |
its a digital scale so it zeros everytime I turn it on. So we all agree this isn't a brass one? lol. We can all wish. I will eventually get it tested so I know for sure.
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
649 Posts |
I noticed same thing on 1 of my 59s same diameter but thinner planchet , for sure.
|
Pillar of the Community

Canada
3423 Posts |
Well, it is a forgone conclusion that EVERY 1858 and 1859 large cent was 1/3 thinner than those which came later, from 1876 on. The 58/59's weighed 4.54 g, while the 1876-1920 large cents weighed 5.67. Since they were ALL the same diameter, the weight is due to the early LC's being significantly thinner.
|
New Member
Canada
10 Posts |
Very cool. Any idea what's the deal with the punch in the center? Was it a method of cleaning or perhaps a method of trade?
|
Pillar of the Community

Canada
3423 Posts |
I think that someone just punched it with a hammer and any kind of punch/bit. It could even be a BB or pellet gun. Your guess; you can see it.
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1184 Posts |
If you have doubts, take it to a Jeweller and have it XRF'd. then you know for sure... then search on the forum for the metal components and hope it has enough of whatever metal to qualify for Brass. or post the results here. then you would have a coin worth a few K.
|
|
Replies: 11 / Views: 599 |
|