| Author |
 Replies: 28 / Views: 4,506 |
|
Valued Member
Canada
449 Posts |
Edited by secoinedchance
11/03/2012 10:14 pm
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
9870 Posts |
Interesting coin.Wasn't 1962 the year the mint first experimented with powdered nickel planchets?
"Dipping" is not considered cleaning...
-from PCGS website
|
|
Valued Member
 Canada
449 Posts |
Edited by secoinedchance
11/04/2012 08:27 am
|
|
Rest in Peace
1988 Posts |
Edited by wert
11/04/2012 7:29 pm
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
449 Posts |
It doesn't look the same as the nickel that shows as an example, but thanks wert. I was kind of hoping that an error expert would stop by and give their opinion.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1472 Posts |
Is it the right weight and normal thickness?
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
449 Posts |
I haven't weighed it yet, but the beaver is not as thick as the coin in the picture beside it so I would say no. It's going to be light.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
937 Posts |
Not enough metal filling the dies? I have a few of the bald beaver variety -- could this be a more extreme example?
|
|
Moderator
 Canada
10463 Posts |
Has all the elements of a weak strike. 1962 is the most common of all early Elizabeth 5-cent coins for finding weak strikes....
"Discovery follows discovery, each both raising and answering questions, each ending a long search, and each providing the new instruments for a new search." -- J. Robert OppenheimerContent of this post is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses...0/deed.en_USMy eBay store
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
449 Posts |
It's more than a weak strike. The beaver if you look at the coin from north to south (north being the top of the beaver) the beaver dips down to almost level with the field. The head and the tail are the normal relief, but the middle is missing metal. Is this a weak strike?
|
|
Moderator
Canada
10463 Posts |
All the highest points of the devices (i.e., deepest parts of the dies), or where the highest points are supposed to be, on both sides of the coin, are what you look for in identifying weak strikes...
"Discovery follows discovery, each both raising and answering questions, each ending a long search, and each providing the new instruments for a new search." -- J. Robert OppenheimerContent of this post is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses...0/deed.en_USMy eBay store
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
695 Posts |
After reading this post, I checked my own 1962 Nickel. Low and behold it looks very much like this one does. Mine has a bit of fur on the shoulder, begind the head and a bit more than yours does near the back end, but the middle of the body is the same.
My guess is that SPP has it right. Yours would have been a VERY weak strike, and mine not as much. If you look at the obverse, it does look like a weak strike, as you can see hardley any details in the queens face, or the part of her hair closest to her face. Again, these would be the high points.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
14454 Posts |
I am no error expert and even less of a Canadian coin collector so definitely no expert in that field but it looks like what we here in the US would call a Grease Filled Die. Have you thought about this possibility that the details were filled with grease and that's why the details are so weak on the coin? it would also make sense as to why you are saying the beaver dips in close to the fields as well. I am just throwing this out there and see if it sticks because as I said I am definitely no expert on errors |
|
Valued Member
Canada
449 Posts |
I've done some research now, and I agree with SPP-Ottawa. It looks like a weak strike. From what I've read some of these can be attributed to testing the dies and whatnot. It would seem as though they were supposed to be removed from circulation, but.somehow made it through. I was incorrectly under the assumption that a major weak strike would also show in the legends and devices as they are also more elevated. Thanks SPP for clearing that up for me.
edit* grammatical error.
Edited by secoinedchance
11/07/2012 10:23 am
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
402 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
9870 Posts |
I think the weak strike may be due to the flow characteristics of the powdered nickel planchets they were trying out in '62.
"Dipping" is not considered cleaning...
-from PCGS website
|
| |
Replies: 28 / Views: 4,506 |
Posted 11/03/2012 8:20 pm
