| Author |
 Replies: 10 / Views: 2,274 |
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
125 Posts |
Hey All,
So I have been nickel hunting the last bit and I have noticed that almost all the post 1965 nickels I have found have at least one almost coin length heavy scratch running over the bust of the monarch.
Does anyone know why this is? Is it just a coincidence or is this something others see as well? Super curious...
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
10743 Posts |
Used in pay telephones and street meters. Oops, maybe you're too young to know this..  Edited by SHAFTA9a
12/05/2017 3:24 pm
|
|
Valued Member
 Canada
125 Posts |
Is that what would cause those scratches? No I am old enough to remember those but I guess using nickels for pay phones and meters was before my time haha :P By then a nickel got you enough to punch in a phone number only (sarcasm of course lol). So maybe the older nickels are from when a nickel would actually get you some time from a meter and a phone and therefore were used more. Makes sense! Poor nickels :'(
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
125 Posts |
Hey Coinfrog, Sorry I have been away for a while and I realized I never got back to you on this. This post jogged my memory because I found another 1963 nickel and it too has large scratches across the entire face of Queen Elizabeth! It is ONLY nickels from the 1960's, in particular 1961-1964 that have this. I have never seen it on any other nickel I have found. The image below shows some examples. You can see it in the top left running left to right parallel to her chin, top right running up and to the left from her chin through her head and second row, second from the left, you can see a bunch of scratches.  I would chalk this up to just being old coins and having damage but I ONLY see this on Canadian nickels from 1961-1964. No other coins. And its not just some nickels in these dates. It is every single one I have ever found coin hunting. Not one exception (I keep every pre-1965 nickel I find). What are your thoughts? |
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
21601 Posts |
A couple look like intentional damage.
The rest are just normal circulation wear.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
125 Posts |
The three I pointed out are the ones with the long scratches. This is one EVERY 1961-1964 nickel I find but no other years.
How is that possible? Is someone scratching these up on purpose? That doesn't seem logical does it?
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
21601 Posts |
Some of the scratches may have been done on purpose but most of them are probably from being used in machines as was earlier mentioned. Whatever the cause and we will probably never know, it is PMDas they didn't leave the mint that way. PS- I checked mine out of curiosity and out of 10, 4 had scratches but not all in exactly the same place. |
|
Valued Member
Canada
125 Posts |
So when the machine damage suggestion came up I thought that could be the cause as well but then why do not other years before or after that period have they same type of markings? Do you by any chance know if these years they were made in such a way that they are thicker then other years?
Sorry for all the questions... its a problem that is really bugging me because I love nickels with the first version of Queen Elizabeth II bust but almost every one I find (1961-1964 are by far the most common) has these terrible gauges.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
150 Posts |
Not on the one 1961 nickel I have.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
999 Posts |
I've seen lines on nickels dating back to the 1920's. I've also seen no lines on early 60's nickels. I have heard before that it is from parking meters, etc. This explanation seems reasonable.
|
| |
Replies: 10 / Views: 2,274 |
|
Posted 12/05/2017 3:30 pm
