<< <i>Yes I have perchased a 1964 typeI & typeII as a pair.The typeI is not upset nor reeded. When you look at the edge you can clearly see the clad sandwich and it is not upset.The type II is upset and not reeded.when I look at the edge of the type II you can see the clad sandwhich, BUT! And this is where the types differ from what I see.....1) I can clearly see what I would term as "plateing" hanging over the edge of this planchet (upset rim).
2) When I look at the surfaces of both type's they are completely different..........Why? ?... ?... >>
I don't know what you're seeing that you take as plating.
The clad coins started off as three large sheets of metal piled one atop another. The inner sheet was thick and extremely pure copper and the outer sheets were very thin cu/ ni alloy. All three were placed in an hydraulic press and under maximum pressure achievable with that era's technology dynamite was explodeabove them and the bonding became secure. this resultant sheet of three metals cladded to gether was then sent to the blanking press- es which stamped out a round disc of metal slightly larger than a dime and called a type I planchet. Coins need to stack and if these planchets were used for striking coins there would be no rim for coins to sit on the coin below and even a small stack of the coins would fall over preventing the ability to count them easily. The rim also serves to take the brunt of the punishment in circulation protecting the degign and allowing them to circulate far longer. For this reason the type I blanks (or planchets) are forced edgewise through two rollers that are set closer than their diameter. This reduces their size and causes most of the metal from the reduced diameter to form a raised area around the planchet and this is the type II planchet nearly ready for striking.
When the planchet is cut from the sheet the sheering action of what the mint calls the dies drags the top cladding layer down and the pure copper core is smeared on the lower clad- ding layer. These might look like plating but it's quite normal and appears on almost all US clad coins. Any gap is caused by delamination.
Type II or upset planchets are usually treated before striking. Many are roughed up for eas- ier handling by the presses and some are polished for mint or proof sets. There's actually a wide wide range of intentional and unintentional processes that these planchets might be subjected to. Much of the reason for the different look in coins is the different preparation of planchets. Of course, die preparation is usually an even bigger factor.
I've seen a wide range of different SMS appearances on coins from cameo, to polished, to matte, to (apparently) full proof. This applies especially to the '65 and somewhat to the '66. Some SMS coins are spectacular and some look like they were poorly struck by circulation dies. But I've never seen any plated post-1964 coin made by the US mint.
<< <i> First is the 1965 that the redbook said dose not exist.If you look at the image you can clearly see the coins in their original cello. >>
from 19Lyds in a post above: As noted by the 2011 Redbook, Pg 339, NO Special Mint Set coins were produced at the San Francisco facility during 1965 as the 1965 Special Mint Set coins were not manufactured until 1966.
Starting in 1964, there were an ugly few years for coin minting. There were production, business strike coins minted in say 1965 that still bore the 1964 date. Then, only in later years, did 1965 coins finally get struck. (And it wasn't only 1965. it continued on..)
This is why there were over 2.5 billion 1964 and 1964D nickels minted.
This is also why 1965 SMS coins were not manufactured until 1966. Everything was a mess. Who to blame? Congress, of course.
As far as the blanks/ planchets .I was simply trying to come to a understand how my 1965 wound up so dark in color.When I first came across this dime I thought I had found a tarnished silver 1965 dime.I grabbed my sight glass and checked the edge of the coin and nope....."clad".I took the same glass and looked closely at the struck surfaceand all I could see what looked like a grainy,glittery,kinda like a pot metal or an alloy.This left me completely miffed and still am. Its funny I still keep going back to check this dime to see if it has a shiny surface......Nope not yet! Its one of those things where it should not be but yet there it is.
So I just went about searching blanks / planchets around 64,65 area.Its important to remember this was a major transition point in time for coinage and who knows what they where testing or different combinations of things they where trying/trials/testing.I can say I found these.
I purchased a Early 1964 original luster blank it came in a cardboard coin holder,staples rusted and much thicker than used today.
I then found and purchased what was labeled 1964 blanks Type I & type II.(observed that type I not upset But blank looks like early !964. Type II is upset and is clad but has a different surface than the type I.
I just recently purchased what was listed as "post 1964" type I & type II. .Have not looked that close at these yet.I'm Thinking This is What they Settled with at that time.Changes to the blanks could still be being made until this day.
Lol . I'm just trying to figure out where my dark 1965 dime came from in all this.I have kind of forgotten that the coin could be a"one of a kind" And now It's... where it came to be?
Anybody that might hold a one of a kind,In their right mind is not going to just toss it in the mailbox and send it off to................,it's in my bank.Crazy, maybe.........stupid,no
Anybody that might hold a one of a kind,In their right mind is not going to just toss it in the mailbox and send it off to................,it's in my bank.Crazy, maybe.........stupid,no >>
I was waiting for this shoe to drop, thank you for not disappointing me.
Sean Reynolds
Incomplete planchets wanted, especially Lincoln Cents & type coins.
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
<< <i>Anybody that might hold a one of a kind,In their right mind is not going to just toss it in the mailbox and send it off to................,it's in my bank.Crazy, maybe.........stupid,no
Like the thread says" whats next?" >>
I must be crazy then as I mailed off my "one of a kind" coin to the folks who have the education and experience credentials to actually validate and attribute it with absolutely no problems at all.
Of course, being crazy, there might have been problems but then I was not in "my right mind" now was I?
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
You're obviously at an impasse. Meaning, you've made up your mind what the coin is (based upon your opinion), you ask opinions on what to do and then ignore the responses for whatever paranoid reasons.
I think your next step is to just leave it in your Safety Deposit Box (thats your bank) and make sure to include it in your will.
Your grandkids or heirs will know exactly what to do with it since they won't be burdened with all these unanswered questions about what it is and where it came from and how grampa came to own it.
I think this is a good logical plan.
Once you're free from this, you'll have time to research exactly why the US Government plated those 1940 dimes with silver. I'm sure it's documented somewhere since they can't really do anything with out the proper paperwork.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
<< <i> Anybody that might hold a one of a kind,In their right mind is not going to just toss it in the mailbox and send it off to................,it's in my bank.Crazy, maybe.........stupid,no >>
<< <i>I took the same glass and looked closely at the struck surfaceand all I could see what looked like a grainy,glittery,kinda like a pot metal or an alloy. >>
It's a 1965 dated coin on a 1965 era clad planchet....
the surface metal is an alloy. The outer layer is a Copper-Nickel alloy.
PS: you need to look up 1965 SMS dime diagnostics. Also, 40-50 sets were not made of 1965, it's more like over 2 million. The 40-50 is for 1964 SMS.
PPS: and that is assuming it is a SMS coin. the more you describe the less it sounds like an SMS coin. grainy? the SMS coins used polished planchets and dies.
<< <i>1) I can clearly see what I would term as "plateing" hanging over the edge of this planchet (upset rim).
2) When I look at the surfaces of both type's they are completely different..........Why? ?... ?... >>
1) machines cut and form these at high speed. bits of metal flake off from being cut and formed. Not unexpected.
2) read the NGC link. planchets go through a polishing process to ... try... to prepare the surface of the planchet for a nicer looking strike. On some struck coins one will find "roller marks" which are a series of parallel lines running across the coin that are left over from early in the planchet making process. These are fairly common poor planchet preparation boo-boos, especially in years past.
<< <i>I have seen what I would term as a plate error on a 1940 mercury head dime.
The U.S. Was in recovery from the Great depression.Why not cut back the Silver just a little and plate it!
>>
you really need to read the forum recommended threads, links, and books.
what you may have been seeing would be called a lamination error. This is an unfortunate term because it can lead to confusion, and perhaps delamination would still be confusing but at least it would lead to a better definition:
de·lam·i·nate - To split into thin layers
all planchets are at some point made from rolled out metal. Some defects can sneak into the roll of metal. tiny areas can be poorly bonded with the surrounding metal thus causing it to flake off at some point.
In 1933, gold was taken by the government. Had they needed to do the same for silver, they would have. Furthermore, if you do the reading, there are no known plated silver coins from then because they continued to make the 90% silver coins as gold and silver continued to back the currency.
If you continue to follow speculative "what ifs" instead of following the written facts, then 19Lyds advice is for you. Keep it in the bank and pass it along to heirs.
PS: this is a 1965 dated coin on a 1965 era planchet. there is nothing valuable there. The only value possibility you have is if it is a SMS coin. Uncirculated ones sell for a few bucks, but your sounds like it is circulated and would sell for a lot, lot less. If not an SMS coin, it sounds like you have a dime worth 10 cents.
<< <i>I then found and purchased what was labeled 1964 blanks Type I & type II.(observed that type I not upset But blank looks like early !964. Type II is upset and is clad but has a different surface than the type I.
I just recently purchased what was listed as "post 1964" type I & type II. .Have not looked that close at these yet.I'm Thinking This is What they Settled with at that time.Changes to the blanks could still be being made until this day.
I all most bought a silver type II. I did not have eighty two bucks though
>>
1964 blanks but type II is clad? no. 1964 blanks are 90% silver. Perhaps the edge has discolored in some confusing way or someone sold you a Type II clad as a 90% silver or you are just totally confused since you obviously didn't buy a 1964 Type II for $82. At this point, this could also be the greatest newbie chain yank thread yet.
While I'm sure the technology to make the clad planchets has improved over the years, to the collector there have been no known changes to the planchets over the years. Copper-Nickel outside bonded to the copper core. Specifications have remained unchanged since going clad.
PS: since you cannot prove the undated blanks and planchets were made in any one year, you really can only refer to them as 1964-and-before or 1965-and-after, either that or 90% silver or clad.
<< <i>I have an image it is 16 kb jpeg I am trying to post. What am I doing wrong? >>
I'll wait for the picture.
The search function works fairly well here. Try searching "posting", most of the hits willbe how to post pictures. >>
Or just go to this thread on using Photobucket to Post Pictures. It's on the Announcements & News forum. >>
Oh right, like he's going to send one of a kind photos of his one of a kind coin to some random website. He's crazy, not stupid.
Sean Reynolds
Incomplete planchets wanted, especially Lincoln Cents & type coins.
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
Incomplete planchets wanted, especially Lincoln Cents & type coins.
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
The coin in your photos is a normal circulated 1965 dime. The coin in the auction you linked was damaged by acid which dissolved the clad layers and some of the copper.
I'm not even sure why I'm posting this, as I do not expect you to agree with either of those statements.
Sean Reynolds
Incomplete planchets wanted, especially Lincoln Cents & type coins.
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
The strike does appear a little unusual as being higher relief than typical. But I doubt it's anything that can't be accounted for by the dark coloration of the fields and having been struck by a new die.
It's funny a year ago at the age of forty eight I suffered a stroke.I suffered severe left side neglect.I also suffered spacial and cognative issues.As my therapy began for my recovery began it was suggested by my neurlogist to find a good hobby to help on the cognition part.For some reason I picked coins as a hobby, and believe me it is just a hobby and all these coins are just coins.
So yes "it's just a dime", and the rest folly at best.Ha, ha, ha,...it's of more importance that I can button my shirt.
Don't invest to much in the hobby, enjoy it! Take care
<< <i>It's funny a year ago at the age of forty eight I suffered a stroke.I suffered severe left side neglect.I also suffered spacial and cognative issues.As my therapy began for my recovery began it was suggested by my neurlogist to find a good hobby to help on the cognition part.For some reason I picked coins as a hobby, and believe me it is just a hobby and all these coins are just coins.
So yes "it's just a dime", and the rest folly at best.Ha, ha, ha,...it's of more importance that I can button my shirt.
Don't invest to much in the hobby, enjoy it! Take care >>
It's not easy to get started in the hobby but now days you can pick it up pretty fast since the information is out there and google will bring it to you. If you really want to you can just buy a $2 folder and put a dime set together. It will cost almost not- hing and you can learn a lot. If you have the money you can collect older coins or high- er grades. There are lots of US coins dating back to the 19th century that can be col- lected on a shoestring.
There are great coins that can be bought for almost nothing.
I agree with the other posters that the dime in question probably isn't one of them, but that's no cause to give up.
Comments
<< <i>Yes I have perchased a 1964 typeI & typeII as a pair.The typeI is not upset nor reeded. When you look at the edge you can clearly see the clad sandwich and it is not upset.The type II is upset and not reeded.when I look at the edge of the type II you can see the clad sandwhich, BUT! And this is where the types differ from what I see.....1) I can clearly see what I would term as "plateing" hanging over the edge of this planchet (upset rim).
2) When I look at the surfaces of both type's they are completely different..........Why?
?...
?... >>
I don't know what you're seeing that you take as plating.
The clad coins started off as three large sheets of metal piled one atop another. The inner
sheet was thick and extremely pure copper and the outer sheets were very thin cu/ ni alloy.
All three were placed in an hydraulic press and under maximum pressure achievable with
that era's technology dynamite was explodeabove them and the bonding became secure.
this resultant sheet of three metals cladded to gether was then sent to the blanking press-
es which stamped out a round disc of metal slightly larger than a dime and called a type I
planchet. Coins need to stack and if these planchets were used for striking coins there
would be no rim for coins to sit on the coin below and even a small stack of the coins would
fall over preventing the ability to count them easily. The rim also serves to take the brunt
of the punishment in circulation protecting the degign and allowing them to circulate far
longer. For this reason the type I blanks (or planchets) are forced edgewise through two
rollers that are set closer than their diameter. This reduces their size and causes most of
the metal from the reduced diameter to form a raised area around the planchet and this is
the type II planchet nearly ready for striking.
When the planchet is cut from the sheet the sheering action of what the mint calls the dies
drags the top cladding layer down and the pure copper core is smeared on the lower clad-
ding layer. These might look like plating but it's quite normal and appears on almost all US
clad coins. Any gap is caused by delamination.
Type II or upset planchets are usually treated before striking. Many are roughed up for eas-
ier handling by the presses and some are polished for mint or proof sets. There's actually a
wide wide range of intentional and unintentional processes that these planchets might be
subjected to. Much of the reason for the different look in coins is the different preparation
of planchets. Of course, die preparation is usually an even bigger factor.
I've seen a wide range of different SMS appearances on coins from cameo, to polished, to
matte, to (apparently) full proof. This applies especially to the '65 and somewhat to the '66.
Some SMS coins are spectacular and some look like they were poorly struck by circulation dies.
But I've never seen any plated post-1964 coin made by the US mint.
But here is an explanation of the blank/planchet making process with pictures.
to NGC
go back a few posts to the forum approved links and threads and book posts. you'll find lots of good reading there.
<< <i> First is the 1965 that the redbook said dose not exist.If you look at the image you can clearly see the coins in their original cello. >>
from 19Lyds in a post above:
As noted by the 2011 Redbook, Pg 339, NO Special Mint Set coins were produced at the San Francisco facility during 1965 as the 1965 Special Mint Set coins were not manufactured until 1966.
Starting in 1964, there were an ugly few years for coin minting. There were production, business strike coins minted in say 1965 that still bore the 1964 date. Then, only in later years, did 1965 coins finally get struck. (And it wasn't only 1965. it continued on..)
This is why there were over 2.5 billion 1964 and 1964D nickels minted.
This is also why 1965 SMS coins were not manufactured until 1966. Everything was a mess. Who to blame? Congress, of course.
This is obviously a homemade one-way street named "I Did It My Way" Blvd.
The name is LEE!
So I just went about searching blanks / planchets around 64,65 area.Its important to remember this was a major transition point in time for coinage and who knows what they where testing or different combinations of things they where trying/trials/testing.I can say I found these.
I purchased a Early 1964 original luster blank it came in a cardboard coin holder,staples rusted and much thicker than used today.
I then found and purchased what was labeled 1964 blanks Type I & type II.(observed that type I not upset But blank looks like early !964. Type II is upset and is clad but has a different surface than the type I.
I just recently purchased what was listed as "post 1964" type I & type II. .Have not looked that close at these yet.I'm Thinking This is What they Settled with at that time.Changes to the blanks could still be being made until this day.
Lol . I'm just trying to figure out where my dark 1965 dime came from in all this.I have kind of forgotten that the coin could be a"one of a kind" And now It's... where it came to be?
Anybody that might hold a one of a kind,In their right mind is not going to just toss it in the mailbox and send it off to................,it's in my bank.Crazy, maybe.........stupid,no
Like the thread says" whats next?"
1) clad error.....the clad sandwhich seperates
2) plateing error.......the plateing falls off,flakes,fleckes off the coin.
Kinda like a bad electroplated jewlery!
I have seen what I would term as a plate error on a 1940 mercury head dime.
The U.S. Was in recovery from the Great depression.Why not cut back the Silver just a little and plate it!
I all most bought a silver type II. I did not have eighty two bucks though
The seller said they are rare........he had Two........oh well
<< <i>
Anybody that might hold a one of a kind,In their right mind is not going to just toss it in the mailbox and send it off to................,it's in my bank.Crazy, maybe.........stupid,no
>>
I was waiting for this shoe to drop, thank you for not disappointing me.
Sean Reynolds
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
<< <i>Anybody that might hold a one of a kind,In their right mind is not going to just toss it in the mailbox and send it off to................,it's in my bank.Crazy, maybe.........stupid,no
Like the thread says" whats next?" >>
I must be crazy then as I mailed off my "one of a kind" coin to the folks who have the education and experience credentials to actually validate and attribute it with absolutely no problems at all.
Of course, being crazy, there might have been problems but then I was not in "my right mind" now was I?
The name is LEE!
<< <i>Like the thread says" whats next?" >>
Simple.
You're obviously at an impasse. Meaning, you've made up your mind what the coin is (based upon your opinion), you ask opinions on what to do and then ignore the responses for whatever paranoid reasons.
I think your next step is to just leave it in your Safety Deposit Box (thats your bank) and make sure to include it in your will.
Your grandkids or heirs will know exactly what to do with it since they won't be burdened with all these unanswered questions about what it is and where it came from and how grampa came to own it.
I think this is a good logical plan.
Once you're free from this, you'll have time to research exactly why the US Government plated those 1940 dimes with silver. I'm sure it's documented somewhere since they can't really do anything with out the proper paperwork.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>I have an image it is 16 kb jpeg I am trying to post. What am I doing wrong? >>
you are trying to attach.
use a photobucket account and use the IMG code method of posting a large file size picture.
SMS coins need big, clear, properly lit pictures to tell the SMS coin from a mint coin or a business strike.
<< <i>
Anybody that might hold a one of a kind,In their right mind is not going to just toss it in the mailbox and send it off to................,it's in my bank.Crazy, maybe.........stupid,no
>>
you mean like this one?
<< <i>I was simply trying to come to a understand how my 1965 wound up so dark in color. >>
Easy.
even Copper-Nickel clad coins change color.
Dark can be expected, but not required, if color has changed.
sometimes they just darken up.
<< <i>I took the same glass and looked closely at the struck surfaceand all I could see what looked like a grainy,glittery,kinda like a pot metal or an alloy. >>
It's a 1965 dated coin on a 1965 era clad planchet....
the surface metal is an alloy. The outer layer is a Copper-Nickel alloy.
PS: you need to look up 1965 SMS dime diagnostics. Also, 40-50 sets were not made of 1965, it's more like over 2 million. The 40-50 is for 1964 SMS.
PPS: and that is assuming it is a SMS coin. the more you describe the less it sounds like an SMS coin. grainy? the SMS coins used polished planchets and dies.
<< <i>1) I can clearly see what I would term as "plateing" hanging over the edge of this planchet (upset rim).
2) When I look at the surfaces of both type's they are completely different..........Why?
?...
?... >>
1) machines cut and form these at high speed. bits of metal flake off from being cut and formed. Not unexpected.
2) read the NGC link. planchets go through a polishing process to ... try... to prepare the surface of the planchet for a nicer looking strike. On some struck coins one will find "roller marks" which are a series of parallel lines running across the coin that are left over from early in the planchet making process. These are fairly common poor planchet preparation boo-boos, especially in years past.
<< <i>I have seen what I would term as a plate error on a 1940 mercury head dime.
The U.S. Was in recovery from the Great depression.Why not cut back the Silver just a little and plate it!
>>
you really need to read the forum recommended threads, links, and books.
what you may have been seeing would be called a lamination error. This is an unfortunate term because it can lead to confusion, and perhaps delamination would still be confusing but at least it would lead to a better definition:
de·lam·i·nate - To split into thin layers
all planchets are at some point made from rolled out metal. Some defects can sneak into the roll of metal. tiny areas can be poorly bonded with the surrounding metal thus causing it to flake off at some point.
In 1933, gold was taken by the government. Had they needed to do the same for silver, they would have. Furthermore, if you do the reading, there are no known plated silver coins from then because they continued to make the 90% silver coins as gold and silver continued to back the currency.
If you continue to follow speculative "what ifs" instead of following the written facts, then 19Lyds advice is for you. Keep it in the bank and pass it along to heirs.
PS: this is a 1965 dated coin on a 1965 era planchet. there is nothing valuable there. The only value possibility you have is if it is a SMS coin. Uncirculated ones sell for a few bucks, but your sounds like it is circulated and would sell for a lot, lot less. If not an SMS coin, it sounds like you have a dime worth 10 cents.
<< <i>I then found and purchased what was labeled 1964 blanks Type I & type II.(observed that type I not upset But blank looks like early !964. Type II is upset and is clad but has a different surface than the type I.
I just recently purchased what was listed as "post 1964" type I & type II. .Have not looked that close at these yet.I'm Thinking This is What they Settled with at that time.Changes to the blanks could still be being made until this day.
I all most bought a silver type II. I did not have eighty two bucks though
>>
1964 blanks but type II is clad? no. 1964 blanks are 90% silver. Perhaps the edge has discolored in some confusing way or someone sold you a Type II clad as a 90% silver or you are just totally confused since you obviously didn't buy a 1964 Type II for $82. At this point, this could also be the greatest newbie chain yank thread yet.
While I'm sure the technology to make the clad planchets has improved over the years, to the collector there have been no known changes to the planchets over the years. Copper-Nickel outside bonded to the copper core. Specifications have remained unchanged since going clad.
PS: since you cannot prove the undated blanks and planchets were made in any one year, you really can only refer to them as 1964-and-before or 1965-and-after, either that or 90% silver or clad.
<< <i>I have an image it is 16 kb jpeg I am trying to post. What am I doing wrong? >>
I'll wait for the picture.
The search function works fairly well here. Try searching "posting", most of the hits willbe how to post pictures.
<< <i>
<< <i>I have an image it is 16 kb jpeg I am trying to post. What am I doing wrong? >>
I'll wait for the picture.
The search function works fairly well here. Try searching "posting", most of the hits willbe how to post pictures. >>
Or just go to this thread on using Photobucket to Post Pictures. It's on the Announcements & News forum.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I have an image it is 16 kb jpeg I am trying to post. What am I doing wrong? >>
I'll wait for the picture.
The search function works fairly well here. Try searching "posting", most of the hits willbe how to post pictures. >>
Or just go to this thread on using Photobucket to Post Pictures. It's on the Announcements & News forum. >>
Oh right, like he's going to send one of a kind photos of his one of a kind coin to some random website. He's crazy, not stupid.
Sean Reynolds
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
http://s1274.beta.photobucket.com/user/coinstudy/media/2013-02-26_11-58-39_747-1_zps2e839feb.jpg.html
Thanks
Sorry it took so long.
<< <i>
Sorry it took so long. >>
Sean Reynolds
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
I have looked at a lot of 1965's to find a match.I found this interesting.
http://pages.ebay.com/link/?nav=item.view&id=400418202709
<< <i>
I have looked at a lot of 1965's to find a match.I found this interesting.
http://pages.ebay.com/link/?nav=item.view&id=400418202709 >>
The coin in your photos is a normal circulated 1965 dime. The coin in the auction you linked was damaged by acid which dissolved the clad layers and some of the copper.
I'm not even sure why I'm posting this, as I do not expect you to agree with either of those statements.
Sean Reynolds
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
it's anything that can't be accounted for by the dark coloration of the fields and having
been struck by a new die.
<< <i>
I have looked at a lot of 1965's to find a match.I found this interesting.
eBay Listing >>
The name is LEE!
<< <i>I found this interesting.
eBay Listing >>
Not a "missing clad layer" error.
Note the edge reeding is gone down to the rim. Acid attack. also known a post mint damage (pmd). (forum lingo dictionary)
So yes "it's just a dime", and the rest folly at best.Ha, ha, ha,...it's of more importance that I can button my shirt.
Don't invest to much in the hobby, enjoy it! Take care
<< <i>It's funny a year ago at the age of forty eight I suffered a stroke.I suffered severe left side neglect.I also suffered spacial and cognative issues.As my therapy began for my recovery began it was suggested by my neurlogist to find a good hobby to help on the cognition part.For some reason I picked coins as a hobby, and believe me it is just a hobby and all these coins are just coins.
So yes "it's just a dime", and the rest folly at best.Ha, ha, ha,...it's of more importance that I can button my shirt.
Don't invest to much in the hobby, enjoy it! Take care >>
It's not easy to get started in the hobby but now days you can pick it up pretty fast
since the information is out there and google will bring it to you. If you really want
to you can just buy a $2 folder and put a dime set together. It will cost almost not-
hing and you can learn a lot. If you have the money you can collect older coins or high-
er grades. There are lots of US coins dating back to the 19th century that can be col-
lected on a shoestring.
There are great coins that can be bought for almost nothing.
I agree with the other posters that the dime in question probably isn't one of them,
but that's no cause to give up.
Best of luck.