1900 Liberty Nickel Struck On Wrong Planchet

So look for what the Mint was striking at the time which could possibly be the right planchet. Venezuela comes to mind. Given that your coin is somewhat worn, it's reasonable to conclude that the weight will be *slightly* lower than the spec weight of whatever donor planchet it actually is, so concentrate on the diameter as a starting point. I'd measure from like 2:30 to 8:30, just where the denticles begin and end, because I'm thinking since it's rimless that the strike would have elongated the planchet somewhat in the NW-SE direction. In fact, it might be a hint as to its' authenticity if it's longer from 11:00-5:00 than it is from 2:30-8:30.

It looks like a raw blank, before upsetting; if you can find a coin minted without a raised rim it might be a help. It seems much more likely that a planchet would get loose of the process after the upsetting operation, rather than before.

Then again, it's always been my belief that many of these errors were caused by deliberate Mint worker actions (heck, I'd do it myself if I could ), so anything's possible.

Well, keep in mind that nickel was a heckuva lot harder to strike than anything preceding it. That's why nickel is such an important alloying compound in aerospace; it's hard, and tough. As a result, striking nickel alloys darn near exceeded the abilities of the dies and equipment of the day; they had to compromise striking pressure in favor of equipment longevity. Fully-struck Liberty nickels are worth a premium to the knowledgeable collector.

Um, yeah, I think that's an appropriate submission.

I can't see the horizontal bars to be sure, but it certainly looks like about a $5k AU example of the lowest-mintage business strike of the series.

I think I'll just sit this one out. I've already expressed my opinions on the other forum this was posted on. But I will say that it can't be Venezuela because the Mint last produced material for them in 1877 and it would be unlikely that any planchets would still be floating around 23 years later. (Besides nothing matches size, weight and composition wise.)

My apologies; I misinterpreted the reference I checked regarding Mint foreign coin production:

http://www.pdxcoinclub.org/articles...%20table.pdf

I took the liberty of checking the opinions you posted elsewhere, and I'd have to agree that the next logical step is to determine the specific gravity of the coin.

Chancellor Sutler, I'll let your post regarding the other forum stand because of the well-deserved compliment you give Conder. However, I ask that in the future we not discuss that place; even though Coin Community was formed by former members there who received the same treatment as yourself, we much prefer not to make public judgments regarding other fora. It's one of those "if you've nothing good to say, keep quiet" kind of things.

Specific gravity will help to determine the exact composition of the metal in your coin, which will obviously narrow the possibilities. I'm also curious as to the quality of the strike given the coin's thinner planchet - it prompts the question of whether the Mint press was mechanically limited in its' travel, or pressure-limited to the extent that the dies could move more closely together than normal during a strike. The latter would have to be true for this to be a genuine coin.

Whole-heartedly agreed.

any updates for us?