| Author |
Replies: 10 / Views: 1,098 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
80 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
16677 Posts |
Sounds good!
swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
80 Posts |
Images 1 & 5 show the 1919 (it's the upper right coin in each shot). It's in pretty good shape.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
16677 Posts |
Looks to be at least F maybe VF from what I can see. Some rim nicks.
swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Valued Member
United States
187 Posts |
Are you sorting out the coppers too?
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
80 Posts |
What do you mean the coppers? I still have all of the other coins and will be going through them to pick the rest for my book.
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
80 Posts |
I guess I shouldn't be washing these. For some of them, the grime seems to make the features stand out. Do you think Dove dish soap and water with a little bit of finger rubbing? Or do I leave them as is?
|
|
Valued Member
United States
187 Posts |
Coins Pre-1982 are 98% copper and are worth a little more than a penny!
|
|
Valued Member
United States
79 Posts |
First roll of pennies a 1916 wheat.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7629 Posts |
Washing coins that you expect a numismatic value return on is not a good thing at all.
Small factual correction - all cents 1963-1982 are 95% copper, 5% zinc - called brass. Prior to 1963 the 5% was a mixture of tin and zinc - called French bronze. This goes back to 1864 (with the exception of 1943) where the composition was changed from copper-nickel.
And picking semantics....1962 actually has both brass and bronze, and 1982 has both brass and plated zinc.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
187 Posts |
Im looking strictly at melt value of the pre 1982 cents. I know this is a numismatic forum so that thought doesn't come to mind first, but thats what I ment about the pre 82 cents
|
| |
Replies: 10 / Views: 1,098 |
|