o.k. new can of worms: Is a dipped coin mint state.

MadMonk

Dipping removes metal....So is that wear.
I guess the services would lose a lot of money not slabbing dipped coins.
MadMonk the Devil's advocate

EVillageProwler

Dipping removes metal....So is that wear.

This is your first mistake: confusing opinion with fact.

EVP

mr1931S

a dipped coin can most certainly still be considered mint-state after dipping...careful dipping will remove chemicals on the surface of the coin and should not react with the coin's base metal...
even a mint-state coin that shows evidence of having been carelessly dipped is not considered to have experienced "wear",however...

a coin with wear,not to be confused with a coin that has softness of strike characteristics that can be more "revealed" to one after dipping,can never be made mint-state again by any process...

kaleidoscopic

If it were dipped, and undetectable it would be considered whatever it grades at. Kscope

MadMonk

<< <i> This is your first mistake: confusing opinion with fact. EVP >>



Nope, not my opinion. I probably could have been more specific. Everything that I've read over my involvement in the hobby says that metal is being removed. Cleaning with MS70, is not what I meant.
Jewelluster is more what I was asking. And Photo's showing luster components reduced.

coppercoins

The point EVP was making and my point is that if dipping is done properly and with care, there's no effect on the metal.

Barry

<< <i>The point EVP was making and my point is that if dipping is done properly and with care, there's no effect on the metal. >>


I disagree. Toning is a chemical reaction between an anion (usually sulfur) and a metal. The color of the toning is determined by the thickness of the resultant compound (eg., silver sulfide). If the toning is removed, there HAS to be some metal removed, even if it is only a few molecules in thickness.

LucyBop

<< <i>If the toning is removed, there HAS to be some metal removed, even if it is only a few molecules in thickness. >>



This all depends on how long and also what chemical is used to dip the coin. One would need Nitric or Sulphric acid to dissolve silver metal. The agents being sold if used properly will not attack the silver metal. Also measurements of thickness is expressed in angstroms or nanometers.

Dog97

It might be MS but it's certianly not original anymore.

MacCoin

if the coin is mint state, the dipping is quick and the coin don't lose its luster you can get away with a MS graded. I don't thing you could get away with dipping the coin a second time with out losing to much luster.

segoja

Dipping seesm to have less reaction with proof than MS coins.

Try not to dip MS coins, as they do ahve a slightly different look, but almost undicernable.

Prrof coins with "stuff" on them need to be dipped, or the "stuff" keeps eating into the coin's surface. Milk spots won;t grow and can't be taken off proofs. If you know the secret, let me in on it.

Conder101

I'm afraid I have to side with Barry on this one. He's right, any dipping with that removes the toning will also remove a small amount of the metal as well. For the first few times the coin is dipped the amount lost is so minute that it is not noticiable. But it has a cumulative effect and repeated dippings, no matter how carefully done will eventually result in a loss of luster from the "etching" of the surface and the loss of the microscopic flow lines.

Mike921

In my opinion wear is wear and that is what keeps a coin from being uncirculated. If you were to dip a well struck Morgan with nice defined breast feathers, it is not going to take away from that, and make it look like it has been plucked. If a coin is dipped too many times then it can start to take away from the luster. It makes it appear to have more of a "artifical luster". These are usually the coins that, when you look at them your like hmmm something just isn't right with the luster but it's awful shiny.

Dipping is not going to turn a UNCIRCULATED coin to circulated but obvious over dipping is considered cleaning.

LucyBop

True, repeated dipping or dipping for an excessive length will damage a coins surface. This depends also on how much toning or oxide growth is on the coin. As a oxide grows, it also consumes the surface it is growing on, so a total removal would indeed remove some of the silver surface. I think it is very unwise to dip coins that have a large amount of toning.....However, as I look at some of my slabbed Franklins that have very nice luster and tons of shine, I don't rule out that some of these coins may have seen a very quick and non-destructive bath. I am now curious as to what chemicals are in jeweluster, I have never owned this, and a search on the internet provided no details on the chemicals used in this product. Anyone know?

BSqr

e*Z*est Coin Cleaner for Copper-Gold-Silver

conntains: Thiourea 62-56-6, Sulfuric Acid 7664-93-9

sottykat

All this dipping talk makes want to go swimming.

What would an experienced "dipperee" recommend as a good solution?

DaveG

By the way, Scott Travers includes a section on dipping in The Coin Collector's Survival Manual that has a 'before' and 'after' picture of the surface of a dipped coin, taken with a scanning-electron-microscope (reprinted from the Swiatek Numismatic Report). You can clearly see that the 'dip' has altered the surface of the coin.

However, I don't think this alteration is considered 'wear', but many authorities recommend against buying "washed-out looking" over-dipped coins.

cladking

Wear is by definition the sloughing off of metal on the high points by mechanical action.
wear is detected by the apparent loss of metal on these high points. The wear causes
a break in the luster and will leave a grayish or off color.

Dipping is the chemical removal of a thin layer of metal from the entire coin. It normally
does not disturb the luster unless it is done many times or is done improperly.

Unless these definitions change then the answer is: Usually, if it were mint state before it
was dipped