| Author |
 Replies: 12 / Views: 2,075 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
9866 Posts |
And does it matter? "Dipping" is not considered cleaning...
-from PCGS website
|
|
|
|
Moderator
 Canada
10463 Posts |
Are you referring to those that were struck in Canada? Or all Canadian coins, including those planchets sourced from Birmingham (which supplied the Heaton and Royal mints)?
Here are my short answers, if including all Canadian coins, regardless of origin:
1) Somewhat variable (excluding alloy mixing errors)
2) Yes (including alloy mixing errors)
"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
2366 Posts |
'Officially' 95% copper, 4% tin & 1% zinc
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
9866 Posts |
According to Charlton's; 1858-1919 95%copper,4% tin,1%zinc 1919-1920 95.5%copper,3%tin,1.5%zinc Acording to Haxby&Willey; 1858-1859 95%copper,4%tin,1%zinc 1876-1920 95.5%copper,3%tin,1.5%zinc The Haxby&Willey figures are also supported by the RCM. Other sources list all large cents as 95%copper,4%tin,1%zinc. "Dipping" is not considered cleaning...
-from PCGS website
Edited by DBM
05/09/2013 5:22 pm
|
|
Moderator
Canada
10463 Posts |
According to our analysis (published CN Journal, 2012)
n=457
1858-1859: 94.31% Cu, 0.90% Zn, 4.14% Sn (remainder of the mean is Pb, Fe, Ni, Bi)
"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
1581 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
9866 Posts |
SPP,have you tested any large cents other than the provincials?
All sources give the specified composition of 1858-59 as 95/4/1.
Your results confirm this,given the technology of those times.
Years ago the compositions as listed in Charlton's were universally accepted.When and why did the schism occur?
"Dipping" is not considered cleaning...
-from PCGS website
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
3234 Posts |
Would these slight variations in metal composition play a major roll in the many hues that are seen in Canadian copper,..
... or is it the oxidation that accounts for 99% of it?
|
|
Moderator
Canada
10463 Posts |
Quote:
SPP,have you tested any large cents other than the provincials? No. It would require a ton of time and effort, in order to have statistical relevance (we have 95% confidence interval with a 450+ sample set of the provincial planchet order). The reason why did it, was of course, was to support our ongoing research in the 1859 brass cent. "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
9866 Posts |
The 1858-59 are definitely 95/4/1 In the years Canadian large cents were struck,the Royal Mint was using 95/4/1 for pennies and 95.5/3/1.5 for halfpennies. Since the halfpenny after 1901 was identical to the large cent in size and weight,it seems reasonable to me to expect that they would both have the same specified composition of 95.5/3/1.5 Is Charlton's wrong? Is the RCM guessing? Were both specifications used? "Dipping" is not considered cleaning...
-from PCGS website
Edited by DBM
05/11/2013 11:57 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1581 Posts |
Quote:
The reason why did it, was of course, was to support our ongoing research in the 1859 brass cent. What are the numbers for those? And, are they just alloy mixing errors? |
|
Moderator
Canada
10463 Posts |
Quote:
What are the numbers for those? Forthcoming, in future papers in the CN Journal... Quote:
And, are they just alloy mixing errors? Yes, read the 2012 paper. "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
9866 Posts |
I find it incredible that,for Canada's most studied series of coins,the Victorian large cents,misinformation about their intended composition is so widespread.
"Dipping" is not considered cleaning...
-from PCGS website
|
| |
Replies: 12 / Views: 2,075 |
|
Posted 05/09/2013 11:14 am
