| Author |
 Replies: 14 / Views: 2,469 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
62 Posts |
 Is the coin on the left maybe coated with something to make it shine. It is almost like a mirror. I found it in a book. It does not look like any of the other 1945P coins I have. The one next to it shows mostly what I have. Thanks for your input. Elaine
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4809 Posts |
Hi Elaine. It may be an impaired proof.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4409 Posts |
Polished
There were no proofs struck from 1943 to 1949.
Edited by MeadowviewCollector
04/19/2016 1:35 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12437 Posts |
It is either heavily polished or plated(chrome?)
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
724 Posts |
Look like a scratched proof to me.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12437 Posts |
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR IT TO BE A PROOF STRIKE BECAUSE THERE WERE NO PROOF COINS STRUCK AT ALL BETWEEN 1943 AND 1949  Edited by biokemist6
04/19/2016 3:02 pm
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
18456 Posts |
Quote:
It is either heavily polished or plated(chrome?)  , Even a MS-68 wouldn't have that mirror finish . |
|
Valued Member
 United States
62 Posts |
In hand it does look chrome like.
Elaine
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4809 Posts |
The coin appears to be from the 60s. The thread title suggests 1945 and the comparative coin looks warlike. Could be polished, plated, or impaired proof I suppose.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4809 Posts |
OK, got a better look on my computer. The 1945 is the coin on the right. The subject coin is the one on the left. For the 1945, this is a typical look for many wartime nickels. The patina for these coins range quite a bit in my experience, but this one is pretty typical. For the subject coin, I can't make out the date. Maybe 1963 or 1965. If 1963, it could be an impaired proof. If 1965 it can't. A buffed/polished/chromeplated coin is possible for either year. Chromeplate will add weight so checking the weight might indicate if the coin is on the higher side. Buffing/polishing would leave micro-abrasions on the surface. Impaired proof would be mirror-like with a few circulation scratches perhaps. Here are a few impaired proofs I found last year. 1963, 1964 and 1969S are proofs. 1965 and 1968D are probably from mint sets, but are high grade business strikes. I don't have a picture of a buffed coin readily available, but they do come up from time-to-time on a CRH event.  |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
18456 Posts |
Elaine , please tell everyone the coin on the left is a 1945 so we can get these proof guys to calm down . also it would be to everyone's interest to photograph the reverse of both coins.  Edited by T-BOP
04/20/2016 07:42 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6326 Posts |
Looks to me like both coins are the same year, 1945. Obviously, someone has tried to improve the value of a Silver War Nickel....polished or plated Edited by eaglefoot
04/20/2016 09:11 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4809 Posts |
I see that now eaglefoot. Unfortunately the picture is too out of focus. Looked at it three times and the glare (and fuzziness) got me on all three tries.
I agree: it was polished for effect.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5198 Posts |
@Rackster
Are you sure the 1964 you have in the folder isn't chrome plated?
It looks like the plating is peeling at 12 o'clock.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4809 Posts |
Hi Jack - just a bunch of stains.  |
| |
Replies: 14 / Views: 2,469 |
|
Posted 04/19/2016 1:33 pm
