| Author |
 Replies: 19 / Views: 3,160 |
|
New Member
United States
29 Posts |
Today I was weighing about 100 halves that I had in a bag to look for errors, and weigh them. I found a few 1971d's that were over 11.35 grams that I set aside then I hit this strange 1972d half:  Here is a 1967 (showing my scale and color of the coin):  and a 1971 (heavier than most):  then a normal half:  I will post reed edge pics soon as it looks unusual. Edited by bobafett
04/16/2013 8:00 pm
|
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
147 Posts |
hmm I dont know if thats within the margin for error or not, more pics please love it
when we have a mystery on our hands I get so pumped
|
|
New Member
 United States
29 Posts |
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
Interesting. Obviously clad, but way heavy. I own that exact same scale, and trust it. Just for the sake of science, grab the included 100g weight and recalibrate the scale. Report back if the weight changes. I doubt it will since it shows other coins accurately, but just to be sure.
|
|
New Member
United States
29 Posts |
My scale didn't come with the 100g weight, I had to buy it separate. Either way came out to the same amount.
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Roger that. I'm standing aside as a spectator now, having zero expertise in this category.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5854 Posts |
The weight should be 11.34g with a tolerance of 0.454g. Though it's heavy, it is within tolerances. If you were to spin the coin on the table does it make the same sound as the 40% silver? While the obverse sort of has the look of silver, the reverse doesn't. Silver is much whiter in appearance while copper nickel clad looks noticeably more gray.
|
|
New Member
United States
29 Posts |
I agree double, the obverse looks very silver, the other doesn't. When I compare to my other 40% coins it looks very similar.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
147 Posts |
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Quote:
The weight should be 11.34g with a tolerance of 0.454g. 0.454g? Good golly, that's the total tolerance the Mint allowed a $1000 bag of Morgans, almost a hundred years earlier. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Israel
2420 Posts |
Perhaps the obverse was plated in silver?
Never tried anything like it, but it might explain both color and weight.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5202 Posts |
Could just be an incorrect ratio in the clad with more nickel. I have had some as high as 11.9g and some as low as 10.4g  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Israel
2420 Posts |
Quote:
Could just be an incorrect ratio in the clad with more nickel. This is highly unlikely, as copper (CU, 29) and nickel (Ni, 28) has practically the same density: 8.95 g·cm^-3 and 8.91 g·cm^-3 respectively. Edited by supgog
04/17/2013 4:14 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3755 Posts |
Looks plated to me. The only non silver years with silver mistakes are 71 and 77, at least that I know of. I think that tolerance is a little much as Dave said. Regardless, I am pretty darn sure that is plated.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
As I have said several times before, the CuNi clad and 40% silver clad halves can not be definitively told apart by weight. Specific gravity will do it but not weight.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
183 Posts |
I would be curious to hear the results of the tissue test. To me there is not a picture that looks silver but coin in hand is a whole different story! Does it have that sweet sound of silver when you set in back on your table? If you do pursue this coin be ready for a great ride. |
| |
Replies: 19 / Views: 3,160 |
Posted 04/16/2013 8:48 pm
