1997 Jefferson Nickel Black Error Sintered In Annealing Oven

I don't collect nickels but that sure is interesting. Looks nice, too.

If it is genuine, it should have cartwheel luster. PMD coins will have impaired luster.

new pictures

Sintering has been debunked as the cause of discolored quarters. We now speak of "improperly annealed planchets". Prolonged exposure to heat or too much oxygen in the annealing oven causes copper and nickel atoms to migrate and segregate out into relatively pure layers. This explanation comes from the Mint and is supported by close study of affected coins. As to whether this particular nickel is a legitimate example, I am not sure.

I have some sad news for you.

I looked at the image, and immediately did an experiment.

I put a nickel on by electric stove element until the element was red hot. I turned it over (using tongs), to roast the other side. I roasted it for about a minute on each side, and immediately plunged it into cold water. When cold (almost immediately), I vigorously rubbed it with a dry cloth.

The result is exactly as you see in the images above. It wasn't even worth photographing. You can repeat the experiment for yourself It took me all of three minutes to perform.

1996 dime .one side red copper color in

I came across this forum in my search to find the origin of a dark, almost black colored nickel that I found. To my delight it looks almost identical to the one pictured here. I was disappointed however to find that many experts here discounted it as a fake. I did some more research about planchet annealing and the 1959 "black beauty" nickels and a few others that occurred in 1958 and then again in 1964. I was astonished to see that in light of those legitimate errors, this 1997 was so easily dismissed here. I then thought that maybe it was because this was faked often. I began a search for other years (except for those previously confirmed) where the black nickels had been reported and was delighted to find that there were almost none and that there were several in 1997. Now I understand skepticism of anomalies in expert circles. I am a well educated molecular biologist and an amateur paleontologist. I have seen experts discount bone shaped "rocks" as non-fossils only to find with further digging (no pun intended) that they were in fact fossils. I have seen the same in molecular biology as well but in a manner that is too detailed to describe in this short communication. My whole point is that "where there is smoke there is usually fire." I find too many occurrences of this black nickel from 1997 while concurrently finding too few from other years to completely accept that this is the result of people faking the black beauty of 1959. In other words why is it not also faked in 1995 or 1989, etc. In interest of being thorough I would think that the experts here should too. Here are a few pictures of my "black" nickel and these are my 5 cents worth.