1968-D Dime Struck on Quarter Stock?
commoncents05
Posts: 10,096 ✭✭✭
Bought a 1968-D Dime from the local B&M today, and it is considerably thicker than a regular dime. Weight is 2.9 grams. Could it be struck on Quarter stock? I would post pictures, but it looks like a normal dime other than being a little thicker. Any thoughts?
Thanks in advance.
-Paul
Thanks in advance.
-Paul
Many Quality coins for sale at http://www.CommonCentsRareCoins.com
0
Comments
<< <i>Do you see a copper core
Yes.
-Paul
The name is LEE!
<< <i>I would guess foreign planchet before quarter stock since a quarter planchet won't fit in the Roosevelt collar. >>
A quarter planchet wouldn't fit, but a dime planchet that was blanked out of rolls of quarter stock would.
-Paul
I get .5426(5.57) = 3.077 grams. Close enuff?
They were the same type of error as the 1970-D quarters made from dime stock: somebody at the Mint put an entire coil of metal intended for one denomination into a blanking press set up to punch out blanks of a different denomination. You had thick dimes and thin quarters.
The dimes were discovered when they were released into one area (Cleveland?) and the local telephone company was plagued with jammed pay telephones!
TD
This happened at San Francisco and not being useable, were forwared to Denver as with certain other SF rejects. Denver wasn't too pleased with the end result.
Well, just Love coins, period.
<< <i>Not at 2.9 gms, that would NOT be quarter stock. >>
A: Is the coin worn down?
B: How accurate is the scale being used?
The simple, and incredibly probable, answer is quarter stock until proven otherwise.
TD
<< <i>The weight of a dime struck on quarter stock would be the area of a dime divided by the area of the quarter. The only varaible between the two is diameter, so we can calculate (17.9/24.3) squared times the quarter weight of 5.67 grams.
I get .5426(5.57) = 3.077 grams. Close enuff? >>
I used 17.91 mm and 24.26 mm and got 3.09 grams, which Ed Fleischmann would have said was "Close enough for government work!"
TD
<< <i>
<< <i>Not at 2.9 gms, that would NOT be quarter stock. >>
A: Is the coin worn down?
B: How accurate is the scale being used?
The simple, and incredibly probable, answer is quarter stock until proven otherwise.
>>
I'm thinking that the percentage greater a type one planchet is to a type two
would probably be more a function of diameter than weight which makes the
3.08 g figure appear even closer.
I bet they made a racket when they were upset.
It's a wonder they got through.
To answer a few questions: The coin is uncirculated. The scale used to get the 2.9g weight is accurate.
Any idea on value on something like this? Worth sending to NGC to get it in a holder?
Thanks again.
-Paul
<< <i>I remember back around that time reading in Collectors Clearinghouse of a batch of clad dimes coming out that were made from quarter-thickness stock, but I don't remember the year(s) of the coins.
They were the same type of error as the 1970-D quarters made from dime stock: somebody at the Mint put an entire coil of metal intended for one denomination into a blanking press set up to punch out blanks of a different denomination. You had thick dimes and thin quarters.
The dimes were discovered when they were released into one area (Cleveland?) and the local telephone company was plagued with jammed pay telephones!
TD >>
Wow!
Ya learn something new everyday. Thanks Capt!
The name is LEE!
would probably be more a function of diameter than weight which makes the
3.08 g figure appear even closer.>>
Cladking has suggested a possible variance in my calculation. My calculation would work if I had the diameters of the original blanks. The numbers I used were the finished coins which might be less than the original blanks when the rims are added and upset.