PVC Residue from US Mint cello?

relayer

I got a BB from NGC on a blue/reddish toned 1962 nickel as PVC Residue.

I took this out from the original US Mint cellophane in a proof set. I can't get a good picture or scan, but it does seem to have some dark spots.

I think the PVC Residue was perhaps a misdiagnosis, but that there is something on the coin (maybe grease from the Mint).

Anybody ever got a BB from PVC after pulling a coin from the original mint packaging?

Trooper

I have a 68 proof set in it's original holder with the dreaded green spots on the Kennedy and I'm sure I have seen pvc damage on some of my mint sets.

cladking

At least the '68 and later sets are packaged between four layers of plastic. The
inner two are very soft and very thin. Some dates do not last well in these pckages
and it wouldn't be surprising if all of them fail in the long run.

Shamika

<< <i>I think the PVC Residue was perhaps a misdiagnosis >>


Relayer, you are right. When a TPG says a coin has been BB'd for PVC, it doesn't mean that PVC actaully exists on the coin. All they are saying is that there APPEARS to be PVC residue on the coin.

I have no idea what this residue is, but it should not be PVC if the mint packaging is cellophane.

darktone

I know exactly what you mean- it may not be PVC but it appears to be a simillar substance. mike

magikbilly

Cellphane can be a pretty wide term. True cellophane, polypropolene and PVC were developed and in use by 1940. True cellophane, which crinkles, may have been used on the early Boxed Mint sets and Proofs prior to abt 1954. I think Pliofilm was in use by the Mint before 1960 - it is composed of rubber hydrochloride. What this particular material does on aging in regard to your coin I do not know. I do not know what plasticizer(s) were added if any to render the material soft - PVC is possible but I do not know.

Best,
Billy

fivecents

I don't know about proof sets , but I can tell you the 1971-S "blue Ike" is notorious for having PVC within the mint cellophane packaging.

magikbilly

Has anyone complied a list of the materials used for packaging Mint and Proof sets from 1936-42 and 1950 on? I do not think actual cellophane has been used for a long time.

Billy

magikbilly

TTT

Conder101

Yes it is possible to get bagged for PVC after removing the coins from mint packaging. Why? Because when they bag for "PVC" residue, they are actually bagging it for traces of the plasticizer that has leached OUT of the PVC. Now the plasticizer is a oil and the grading service doesn't actually test to see if an oil residue is from PVC. If they see the oil, they bag it. Now coins are struck on presses that are lubricated with oil and grease, and the dies usually have a thin film of oil on them to help prevent rusting. If there are traces of this oil remaining on proof or mint set coins and the service sees it they will bag it for "PVC" even though it has never been around PVC.

relayer

Good analysis Conder

Bochiman

Along these lines, what about the plastic wrap used on some of the current US Mint products?
THe state quarter series in the card sets? They have plastic wrapped around them.

Also, what about the plastic wrappings the banks use for rolls? What damage and how long for those?

magikbilly

Hi,
that is what I asked in my first post to this thread - what plasticizer is/was in the Mint issued Pliofilm? Has anyone compiled a list the various materials used for packaging Mint and Proof sets? I should think the current materials have been thought out - but then again the L & C pouch....

Billy

JRH

<< <i>Anybody ever got a BB from PVC after pulling a coin from the original mint packaging? >>



Yes, I once sent in a freshly opened mint set (coins never touched and palaced in non PVC flips). Both nickels and one of the dimes came back body bagged for PVC. The rest of the coins were graded MS62-66.

I started a thread like this one, but never got a real definitive answer. Go figure ?????