Here's an error you don't see every day - but it's nothing special after all

seanq

I picked this coin up a while back on eBay, where it was described as a rolled thin silver planchet / end of strip straight clip. I thought the coin looked clad, not silver, so I bought it thinking it might be a struck or separated clad layer. On examining it, I now believe the planchet consists of two clad layers with no copper core. Can anyone determine if the weight (1.6g) is right for such an error?

UPDATE: Isent the coin to another forum member who was able to determine the coin is 90% silver, and likely a victim if post-Mint damage.






Sean Reynolds

LochNESS

I was expecting a definite fact with explanatory evidence, not an educated guess.

I might've called it a Chinese fake, but why would they bother on dimes? ... Man it's got so much wear, too.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

kranky

According to a CW article about a similar dime, "A dime blank weighs around 2.27 grams. Each clad layer weighs approximately 0.4 gram while the core weighs around 1.47 grams." The article has an interesting analysis.

7Jaguars

Wow, that is a dog of a coin. The spot on FDR's cheek looks to be penetration into possible cladding however? The higher copper concentration makes it more vulnerable to oxidation, particularly when subject to water.

Be interesting to have a look at it...

halfhunter

Sure seems that it could well be struck on a coreless flan, especially since it was obviously punched at the edge of the blanking strip.
I'm also guessing that much of the "wear" could actually be from a soft strike . . . which would be logical as the coin is much thinner without the core.

Nice find ! ! !

HH

ricko

How would it not have a copper core?? Cheers, RickO

silverpop

get it looked over by a expert and graded as a error then i'll believe it is real

seanq

I suppose this could be PMD, I admit it's been a while since I examined it in hand, I stumbled across the pics recently and decided to post it. I'll loot at it again in hand and see if I can remember what drove me to that conclusion.

As far as how such an error can happen, when the clad strip is bonded the three layers aren't always the exact same length. Under normal circumstances the end of the strip should be trimmed off but I assume in this case that didn't happen. Below is another dime from the same era with the opposite error as the coin above, the cladding ran out before the copper core, leaving a portion of the core exposed. This is also a straight clip, one of the few times I feel 100% certain attributing such an error as from the end of the planchet strip:



A forum member has offered to do some analysis of the composition of my coin, so in a few weeks I'll have that info to update the thread as well.


Sean Reynolds

kranky

Does the weight of 1.6g (let's say it could have been 1.7g if there was no clip) make sense if the content was two clad layers without a core, but rolled to the standard dime thickness?

seanq

<< <i>I was expecting a definite fact with explanatory evidence, not an educated guess. >>



Working on it, in the meantime please refer to my sig line.




<< <i>get it looked over by a expert and graded as a error then i'll believe it is real >>



*siiiiiigh*

I understand this mentality, but man, someone needs to tell me what Coin University I need to attend and where to post pics of my diploma. I've been collecting errors for 30 years, and specializing in incomplete planchets for 25. I know my name doesn't carry the cachet of Fred Weinberg or Tom Delorey, but if I had a dollar for every time one of them said "I agree with Sean" on posts in this forum, I could send in that dime in for grading.

I also freely admit I make mistakes, and when I do I own up to them, so if my coin turns out to be nothing but a washing machine slug, you'll know about it.


Sean Reynolds

silverpop

just a little advice makes no matter to me if you take it or not

CaptHenway

Sean, I suspect you are right on. End of a coil where the copper ran out before the cladding, and then it ended at the straight "clip."

Don't think you could calculate an expected weight, as the cladding layers themselves would be non-standard (not rolled as thin as normal because of the lack of pressure at this point) and/or running out. The weight is what the weight is.

All you need now is the specific gravity to confirm that it is copper-nickel. I am sure that it will.

TD

CaptHenway

<< <i>get it looked over by a expert and graded as a error then i'll believe it is real >>



Sean IS an expert in his field.

TwoSides2aCoin

Fred W. will chime in. Bet !

7Jaguars

Wow, specific gravity of nickel and copper are very close - (in kg/m squared):

8800
8930

CaptHenway

<< <i>Wow, specific gravity of nickel and copper are very close - (in kg/m squared):

8800
8930 >>



You can't tell them apart via s.g. This is to prove that it is not silver, as per the original seller.

gonzer

<< <i>

<< <i>get it looked over by a expert and graded as a error then i'll believe it is real >>



Sean IS an expert in his field. >>



Sean's expertise is unquestionable, end of debate!

Interesting coin although it's condition is puzzling; the pitting of the fields.

7Jaguars

Nobody has explained what looks to be oxidation of the underlying metal at FDR's cheek. Reminds me of forees (sp?) in the ancient coin world where there is selective oxidation of the underlying metal layer...

IrishMikey

First thought is that the remnants of the date look like 195- to me, which would make it
a 90% silver piece. If that is the case, I would think it is post-strike damage, not an error.

JRocco

<< <i>

<< <i>

<< <i>get it looked over by a expert and graded as a error then i'll believe it is real >>



Sean IS an expert in his field. >>



Sean's expertise is unquestionable, end of debate!

Interesting coin although it's condition is puzzling; the pitting of the fields. >>



I wish I knew as much as Sean has forgotten about coin errors.

halfhunter

<< <i>First thought is that the remnants of the date look like 195- to me, which would make it
a 90% silver piece. If that is the case, I would think it is post-strike damage, not an error. >>



Looks more like 197 to me . . .

HH

goodmoney4badmoney

Interesting coin. It looks almost overly worn and the spot below Roosevelt's eye is a tad troublesome, but the weight is significantly light with a clip seems to look legit... and a clip that size would not account for such a low weight.

LanceNewmanOCC

.
i'm not saying it is a 5 or a 7, just showing the comp. prob need to do a couple other decades to be certain imo.

ctf_error_coins

Although the error is extremely cool, I would really have problems adding a coin with so much damage to my collection.

cladking

<< <i>

I understand this mentality, but man, someone needs to tell me what Coin University I need to attend and where to post pics of my diploma. I've been collecting errors for 30 years, and specializing in incomplete planchets for 25. I know my name doesn't carry the cachet of Fred Weinberg or Tom Delorey, but if I had a dollar for every time one of them said "I agree with Sean" on posts in this forum, I could send in that dime in for grading.

I also freely admit I make mistakes, and when I do I own up to them, so if my coin turns out to be nothing but a washing machine slug, you'll know about it.

>>



I usually agree with Sean (and always watch for his posts).

Not this time though.

cladking

I think it's an '80-P by the by and don't have a clue what's wrong with it.

Perhaps something strange was in the blanking press.

MsMorrisine

I'd like to see a 60 80 and 90 side by side

The clip is very thin in some spots(like directly under the date)

It is very odd, even the wear AND the clip can't explain that weight.

CaptHenway

A simple specific gravity test will tell if it is silver or copper-nickel. No need to guess at the date.

The odd weight can easily occur due to the tapered end of a coil.

As to the damage, normal coins get damaged after they leave the Mint. I have seen normal coins beat up this badly, or worse. There is no reason why an error coin cannot get beaten up in circulation as well.

MsMorrisine

Hmm.

I guess I was assuming this started as a normal thickness blank...

errormaven

As my article that was linked to indicates, normal-diameter, solid copper-nickel dimes do exist. Some are underweight and some are overweight. Establishing that the solid composition is due to a mishap in the bonding mill is problematical. Some of these coins are off-metal errors (many of them "orphans"). However, the presence of a straight clip would add weight to the idea that this is a coreless dime. As Tom DeLorey indicates, a specific gravity test (or better yet, an x-ray flourescence analysis) would tell you for sure whether it's copper-nickel or silver.

It's a pity that the coin is so beaten-up. That reduces its interest and value and, more importantly, also hampers analysis.

cladking

<< <i>As my article that was linked to indicates, normal-diameter, solid copper-nickel dimes do exist. Some are underweight and some are overweight. Establishing that the solid composition is due to a mishap in the bonding mill is problematical. Some of these coins are off-metal errors (many of them "orphans"). However, the presence of a straight clip would add weight to the idea that this is a coreless dime. As Tom DeLorey indicates, a specific gravity test (or better yet, an x-ray flourescence analysis) would tell you for sure whether it's copper-nickel or silver.

It's a pity that the coin is so beaten-up. That reduces its interest and value and, more importantly, also hampers analysis. >>



Due to the way the bonded strip is made and the improbability that two cn/ ni strips could
adhere to one another my best guess is that scrap and debris from other processes sometimes
gets wrapped up into rolls of finished strip. Most industrial coils are wound and unwound from
floor level so anything that happens to "fall" onto the winding strip is likely to be wrapped up in
the coil. The companies that make these coils would make numerous other flat and coiled pro-
ducts. Due to the scarcity of these strange coins and the probable anecdotal evidence that this
one has a straight edge clip it seems almost certain that these are small pieces of metal getting
into the system.

errormaven

Interesting suggestion. I'll add this scenario to the list of possibilities that might explain some orphan off-metal errors.

tincup

Interesting coin Sean; keep us informed with any other info you find out on this.

CaptHenway

<< <i>

<< <i>As my article that was linked to indicates, normal-diameter, solid copper-nickel dimes do exist. Some are underweight and some are overweight. Establishing that the solid composition is due to a mishap in the bonding mill is problematical. Some of these coins are off-metal errors (many of them "orphans"). However, the presence of a straight clip would add weight to the idea that this is a coreless dime. As Tom DeLorey indicates, a specific gravity test (or better yet, an x-ray flourescence analysis) would tell you for sure whether it's copper-nickel or silver.

It's a pity that the coin is so beaten-up. That reduces its interest and value and, more importantly, also hampers analysis. >>



Due to the way the bonded strip is made and the improbability that two cn/ ni strips could
adhere to one another my best guess is that scrap and debris from other processes sometimes
gets wrapped up into rolls of finished strip. Most industrial coils are wound and unwound from
floor level so anything that happens to "fall" onto the winding strip is likely to be wrapped up in
the coil. The companies that make these coils would make numerous other flat and coiled pro-
ducts. Due to the scarcity of these strange coins and the probable anecdotal evidence that this
one has a straight edge clip it seems almost certain that these are small pieces of metal getting
into the system. >>



I am curious. Why do you think it unlikely that the two copper-nickel strips would bond together if rolled together? I can't think of any reason why they would not.

TD

cladking

<< <i>
I am curious. Why do you think it unlikely that the two copper-nickel strips would bond together if rolled together? I can't think of any reason why they would not.
>>



Most metals will not bond under pressure like this. Perhaps stated more accurately most metals would need
far higher pressures to bond together than is required to reduce their thickness. Due to differences in their
bulk moduli most disparate metals would come out of a rolling press at different angles. Even same metals
that won't bond will curl apart each in the direction of the roll.

The mint had a lot of trouble initially getting the strips to bond. There was no process to do it by rolling and
they used an explosive bonding technique with the three layers of metal stacked in an hydraulic press under
very heavy load and then dynamite was exploded above it to complete the bonding. Despite this many '65
and '66 quarters can be found delaminated (usually on one side). This was usually caused by contaminants
(oil) on the surface of one sheet or another. I believe the new process was phased in very early and by mid-
'67 all strip was made by the new technique.

If an engineer wanted to bond two cu/ ni strips he could probably do it without extreme effort but I believe
it's very improbable this would ever occur inadvertantly.

CaptHenway

I am under the impression that at some point the Mint and/or its coil suppliers adopted a process whereby the inner faces of the two copper-nickel cladding layers and both faces of the copper core were roughened in some manner, so that when the roughened surfaces were rolled against each other under high pressure a certain amount of interlocking would occur. I cannot document this in any way.

If this is true (and as I say I cannot document or prove it) then the roughened inner faces of the two cladding layers should bond together under pressure.

Conversely, as somebody else suggested, it is possible that only one cladding layer protruded beyond the copper core, and that the piece was struck on a solid piece of copper-nickel that is tapered thin and ending with a "straight clip" at the end of the strip.

errormaven

You are correct, Tom. The surface of the clad strip selected to face the copper core strip is cleaned and roughened by rotating descaling brushes. As a result, you can usually see striations on that face. The core strip is also presumably cleaned in the same fashion. One of the "coreless" dimes in my article shows these striations.

MsMorrisine

<< <i>

<< <i>
I am curious. Why do you think it unlikely that the two copper-nickel strips would bond together if rolled together? I can't think of any reason why they would not. >>


Most metals will not bond under pressure like this. Perhaps stated more accurately most metals would need
far higher pressures to bond together than is required to reduce their thickness. Due to differences in their
bulk moduli most disparate metals would come out of a rolling press at different angles. Even same metals
that won't bond will curl apart each in the direction of the roll.
The mint had a lot of trouble initially getting the strips to bond. There was no process to do it by rolling and
they used an explosive bonding technique with the three layers of metal stacked in an hydraulic press under
very heavy load and then dynamite was exploded above it to complete the bonding. Despite this many '65
and '66 quarters can be found delaminated (usually on one side). This was usually caused by contaminants
(oil) on the surface of one sheet or another. I believe the new process was phased in very early and by mid-
'67 all strip was made by the new technique.
If an engineer wanted to bond two cu/ ni strips he could probably do it without extreme effort but I believe
it's very improbable this would ever occur inadvertantly. >>




Are you saying the same process that bonds CU-ni to CU won't bond two CU-ni together? Or are you saying it is unlikely they ran out of core first?

cladking

<< <i>


Are you saying the same process that bonds CU-ni to CU won't bond two CU-ni together? Or are you saying it is unlikely they ran out of core first? >>



I can't state they wouldn't bond; merely that it's probably improbable.

CaptHenway

<< <i>

<< <i>


Are you saying the same process that bonds CU-ni to CU won't bond two CU-ni together? Or are you saying it is unlikely they ran out of core first? >>



I can't state they wouldn't bond; merely that it's probably improbable. >>



Again, I ask you why not? What would keep them from bonding?

errormaven

I'm not sure what would prevent bonding, either. Rolled-in and struck-in metal fragments (Cu-Ni and otherwise) fuse quite nicely to strip and coin, respectively. Then again, I'm not a metallurgist

errormaven

I'd be happy to do a specific gravity test for you, Sean.

Mike Diamond

seanq

<< <i>I'd be happy to do a specific gravity test for you, Sean.

Mike Diamond >>




Thanks, Mike, I'm going to send it to another forum member for Xray spectroscopy analysis. I looked at the coin again tonight and I don't see anything that immediately screams clad vs silver. The coin is so thin the ring test is not reliable. One negative is that the strike is a bit stronger in the center of the design than maybe it should be. One positive thing I did notice is what looks like a seam inside the clipped edge. That could be damage from metal on each face being pushed together, or it could be something more interesting. I'm certainly not as confident tonight as I was when I posted the pictures.


Sean Reynolds

Coinstudy

I had read somewhere that this occurs in the rollers.The layers can slip out of line.It happens along the front edge or the back edge.the sheet stock is cut into strips and then the blanks are punched.If the blank is at the front or back of the strip it might be missing a layer.The "coreless" coins happen the same way.Rare but it happens.

ricko

Sean... thanks for the explanation..... will appreciate anything further you learn on this interesting error. Cheers, RickO

CaptHenway

<< <i>

<< <i>I'd be happy to do a specific gravity test for you, Sean.

Mike Diamond >>




Thanks, Mike, I'm going to send it to another forum member for Xray spectroscopy analysis. I looked at the coin again tonight and I don't see anything that immediately screams clad vs silver. The coin is so thin the ring test is not reliable. One negative is that the strike is a bit stronger in the center of the design than maybe it should be. One positive thing I did notice is what looks like a seam inside the clipped edge. That could be damage from metal on each face being pushed together, or it could be something more interesting. I'm certainly not as confident tonight as I was when I posted the pictures.


Sean Reynolds >>



Please do get the s.g. done as well. It is a very useful tool in authentication.

TD

seanq

TTT. The coin is silver and nothing special.


Sean Reynolds