The effect on dipping a coin like this- Before and After
Alltheabove76
Posts: 1,514 ✭✭✭
I wasn't going to dip this. But, after reading everyone's comments and hearing that it would probably be OK, I took the peer pressure plunge and did it. Can't say that I am dissapointed!
0
Comments
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
<< <i>It's probably already been dipped, so another dip would completely wash-out the remaining luster, and there's no guarantee it would entirely remove the stains, because they look pretty nasty. I'd have to examine the stains in-hand to know if they'd come off with a dip, but my gut says they wouldn't. >>
The luster is terrific on this coin. (MS66 like). Too bad there isn't a way to dip a coin that doesnt harm the luster. But, I'd rather have it spotty than dead.
My Early Large Cents
Acetone wasn't good enough for a couple of problem-Morgans a friend had. They needed eZest and proper rinsing. Luster was unimpaired and PCGS just graded them MS65. I think I have before and after pix.
That Peace dollar would likely benefit from dipping. But I suspect some of those stains may have already etched the surface.
Lance.
Hoard the keys.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
How much damage can you do to a $50 coin anyway? Dip it, get it in a 64 holder for around $30 (or more), sell it for 50 bucks and lose money!
the before and after pics are below on my page two (the page I linked)
the holder is in the OP.
the decision was mixed.
some thought it looked fine before, and others thought fine after. I thought it looked worse after.
This Peace dollar looks like some of the lighter stuff might come off. It might be improved in the hands of a qualified conservationist.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>How much damage can you do to a $50 coin anyway? Dip it, get it in a 64 holder for around $30 (or more), sell it for 50 bucks and lose money!
That coin is a sure MS65 ($150 coin) maybe 65+ ($200 coin)
My Early Large Cents
<< <i>I would really like to see before and after pics. What is the best product to dip coins? >>
The owner would prefer I not post images of the coins just graded. He'll likely sell them. Here are two others he didn't send in for grading.
I suspected PVC (I still think so) but acetone wasn't helping. So we used eZest (nee Jewel Luster), the usual dip, diluted 50%, for 5-10 seconds.
A shame about the chin scuff on the PL. Oddly it was improved (it is not a lighting-thing) a little.
Lance.
BEFORE
AFTER
<< <i>
<< <i>How much damage can you do to a $50 coin anyway? Dip it, get it in a 64 holder for around $30 (or more), sell it for 50 bucks and lose money!
That coin is a sure MS65 ($150 coin) maybe 65+ ($200 coin) >>
I've got a few rolls to sell you then! I'll let you have them for $125 each, and no stains either!!
P.S. That coin is worth melt as is, might as well dip it.
-Dipping in Jeweluster removes SILVER SULFIDE. It does NOT remove SILVER in a quick dip.
-See above.
-This means that dipping does NOT harm luster on white coins, or white areas of coins.
-Whether or not a dip will harm luster is related to the type and depth of the toning.
-Most lightly toned coins can be dipped more than a couple of times and not have luster impacted.
Coins become "dead" when they go through a dip-retone-dip-retone cycle several times. Each time the coin tones, it converts atomic silver into silver sulfide, which is removed by a dip. This is what harms luster.
If you dip a white coin 10 times in a row, without allowing the coin to retone between dips, there will be no impact to luster. Try it, and you'll see.
If you want to harm luster, allow the coin to retone between dips.
<< <i>Why do people think dipping hurts luster? It only affects the toned parts of the coin.
P.S. That coin is worth melt as is, might as well dip it. >>
Why do you think the coin is only worth melt? That is really very glib of you.
My Early Large Cents
Recipient of the coveted "You Suck" award, April 2009 for cherrypicking a 1833 CBHD LM-5, and April 2022 for a 1835 LM-12, and again in Aug 2012 for picking off a 1952 FS-902.
My Early Large Cents
It has to be an A coin in the grade, not B nor C.
Those remaining areas will keep it from a plus no matter the grade.
<< <i>This coin looks like it may have been dipped in the past and was poorly rinsed. Thoughts? >>
100% .
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Take a cotton swab (no plastic shaft) and get some diluted dip on the tip. Gently apply the swab on the surface above the (minor by now) discoloration. You can always strengthen the dipping solution if the first try is ineffective. You can do this 3 or 4 times and the effect on the surrounding areas will be unnoticeable. While TomB is technically right about the toning at the rim near the tail, I think it will have no deterrent effect on the holdered grade. On the reverse. Near the rim. The gasket will dramatically minimize its ability to distract.
I know. I know. Don't touch a coin with a cotton swab. .
Almost always true with proof coins, but the pressure on the swab matters according to the fragility of the surface. This date generally and this piece particularly have the frosty finish to surely tolerate some light attention. '22-P's have the most booming surface of any P-Mint in the series. They almost begged to be dipped. Check for marks under water first as previously recommended.
<< <i>Here is an MS66 from coinfacts worth about $600. What makes mine not as nice?
>>
the plastic
<< <i>
<< <i>Here is an MS66 from coinfacts worth about $600. What makes mine not as nice?
>>
the plastic >>
First, you can't get $600 for that coin, even in 66 plastic. Second, you can't get 60 bucks for your coin, in no plastic.
Without the coin in hand there are some qualities we can't speak for, but it's clear from the pics that yours has a weaker strike than the comparison coin, especially in hair ends and in the letters and rays on the reverse.
I think yours is a relatively appealing coin for a generic date dipped-white Peace dollar, and there is no doubt the dip improved it. I think 65 is a more likely grade here. With that new raw, reactive surface, you might also think about slapping it in a cardboard album for a decade or so, as it might pick up some handsome color.
while there are clearly slight shadows where the tone was heaviest I think the overall appearance of the coin is dramatically improved. it doesn't always have to be about making a coin grade higher, sometimes it can be about improving its eye appeal and I think this is a good example of that. to your point of finding a way to dip a coin without harming the luster I believe the best approach is to dilute the dip 50/50 with distilled water and rinse immediately to excess, you have a slower reaction and better result from my experiences.
also, I think a mid-grade coin with tone like this is a good one to gain experience with. I understand some members are against dipping altogether, but we should just accept that it is going to be done so we might as well learn how to do it correctly.
<< <i>
<< <i>Why do people think dipping hurts luster? It only affects the toned parts of the coin.
P.S. That coin is worth melt as is, might as well dip it. >>
Why do you think the coin is only worth melt? That is really very glib of you. >>
It's an ugly, common date, weakly struck coin. Sorry but that's the case.
http://macrocoins.com
<< <i>looks like it has more luster after dipping than before >>
There's no way to make it have "more luster" since luster = the frosty physical texture of the metal produced by striking, prior to any friction. What the dip did is to strip off the layer of gunk that was concealing the reflectivity of the underlying luster.
<< <i>
<< <i>looks like it has more luster after dipping than before >>
There's no way to make it have "more luster" since luster = the frosty physical texture of the metal produced by striking, prior to any friction. What the dip did is to strip off the layer of gunk that was concealing the reflectivity of the underlying luster. >>
I was waiting for someone to point that out and you are of course correct. I should have said "more visible luster" or "more apparent lust". Dipping can never add more luster to a coin.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>Why do people think dipping hurts luster? It only affects the toned parts of the coin. >>
If that were true, a coin could be dipped over and over without hurting the luster.