| Author |
 Replies: 11 / Views: 2,425 |
|
|
New Member
United States
19 Posts |
Hi! I am having trouble figuring out whether this coin is MS or a Proof coin. This came from a coin roll. I am not exactly sure what a circulated proof is supposed to look like. Does it start looking mint state over time? I am more inclined to think it's proof, given some sharp features on obverse and reverse. Are there any identifying features that I need to look for to determine proof-state in a circulated coin? Thank you.    |
|
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
18456 Posts |
I am confident in saying this is a Business strike ( Not an impaired proof ) But I have to admit it's a real nice strike with decent steps for the date . AU-58 .  |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
8938 Posts |
I'll disagree with the bopper on this one, I think it's an impaired proof. PF58.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
56 Posts |
Whether proof or not I'm not sure, but it looks like it was subject to PVC damage then improperly cleaned.
|
|
New Member
 United States
19 Posts |
Thanks for the replies! Is there any way to identify a circulated proof? any features that can show up under a scope?
th3ogr3 - I am not sure how you can tell from the images that this is a cleaned coin? or for that matter, PVC damage?
thanks!
|
|
Valued Member
United States
56 Posts |
I've been through a lot of damaged circulated mint sets and have experimented with cleaning them. The patterns on this coin look eerily familiar to what I've seen with severe PVC hazed coins that have been cleaned. I notice also that the haze toning seems to be heavier and more consistent through certain areas of the lettering. I've got quite a few coins that look very similar to this. Unless the image is causing my eyes to play tricks on me.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
56 Posts |
I think I'm leaning towards being with T-BOP in thinking your coin is a business strike, but I think it's uncirculated. Be nice to see some other opinions. I'm by no means a nickel expert. Here's an example of a PVC hazed coin of mine that underwent a protracted acetone soak.  Edited by th3ogr3
12/18/2019 4:19 pm
|
|
New Member
United States
19 Posts |
th3ogr3 - thank you for the information!
|
|
Valued Member
United States
56 Posts |
Yw. Nice to be able to help out for a change instead of ask questions. It looks to me like someone tried to rub the haze off of the coin.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
715 Posts |
Tex, do you notice any mirror shine hidden in protected areas on the coin surfaces? This is what I'd be looking for with the coin in hand. I'm also not clear on if there are other distinguishing characteristics that would flag this as an impaired proof, and I'd be personally erring on the side of business strike without something more to point to.
|
|
New Member
United States
19 Posts |
Oijogja - I am not sure what the protected area of the nickel is. I will try and take some more pics in different lighting conditions if that helps. The ones I took don't do justice to the coin and the image appears a bit more granular than it actually is.
Thanks.
|
|
New Member
United States
19 Posts |
Here are some more pictures. The first two pics are the obverse and reverse of 1961- the coin in question (impaired proof or business strike). The next pic is the same coin compared to a 1962-D under the same lighting conditions. I don't know if that helps but let me know if there are any other specific areas that would be helpful thanks.    |
| |
Replies: 11 / Views: 2,425 |
|
Posted 12/18/2019 1:52 pm
