Thread: 1974 silver quarter

Hi all....guess I have lurked too long & it is now my time to ask. Just afraid of getting shot down about stupid questions or answers I might give I suppose.

I have what I believe is a 1974 silver clad (40%) silver Washinton quarter. I know, they didn't make those.

I have had it since the late 70's. My mom's found it in change when she was working cash register. She has always saved ANY silver she found.

I had it weighed years ago, '79-'80 (at my local coin shop) & it was the weight of the '76 silver clad. Of course they offered me 5 bucks for it....it's just a proof & not worth anything...of course there is no mint mark on it but it is only a proof.

My guess is a transitional metal error.

Has anyone ever heard of this error? I have searched for years & have never heard of one on a 74 quarter.

I know...pics, but I have a poor camera & lets not even talk about pics under magnification.


Thanks Much

Originally Posted by alldrr5

Hi all....guess I have lurked too long & it is now my time to ask. Just afraid of getting shot down about stupid questions or answers I might give I suppose.

I have what I believe is a 1974 silver clad (40%) silver Washinton quarter. I know, they didn't make those.

I have had it since the late 70's. My mom's found it in change when she was working cash register. She has always saved ANY silver she found.

I had it weighed years ago, '79-'80 (at my local coin shop) & it was the weight of the '76 silver clad. Of course they offered me 5 bucks for it....it's just a proof & not worth anything...of course there is no mint mark on it but it is only a proof.

My guess is a transitional metal error.

Has anyone ever heard of this error? I have searched for years & have never heard of one on a 74 quarter.

I know...pics, but I have a poor camera & lets not even talk about pics under magnification.


Thanks Much

Pictures don't need to be magnified in this case. Is the edge a solid or mostly solid silver color with no copper color? If possible, take a picture next to both a "regular" (clad, i.e. 1965-date) quarter and next to a silver quarter, either 1976 or 1964-earlier, to give an idea of color.

If you're fairly confident it is real, it could be worth a lot but generally only if you get it authenticated.

The edge is completely silver color...no copper...not even a hint of discoloration. The whole coin is White & it is not a proof.

My mom brought home all silver coins since '69...thur '85 & you get alot of them when your operating a cash register. As soon as it hit the till she heard "that" sound & brought it home & put it in another of the many "jars". Saw it & pulled it right back out. Of course I was about 15 at the time & knew that I had just paid 4 dollars for a silver bicentenial proof quarter.

This coin has no proof qualities even though every coin shop I have ever taken it to says that is what it is. Of course, then it should be an error for having no mint mark.

I am still sticking with a trans. metal error & waiting to see if another has ever been found.

Will scan/photo this week & see if I can figure out how to upload them.

Thanks for responding....I really think this could be one of a kind or very few out there.

CHEERS

Weight is not going to be sufficent to tell a 40% silver quarter from a clad. The weight difference is only .08 grams and the weight tolerance allowance is +/- .22 grams. So the weight can vary by almost three times the difference in the weights. You would have to do a specific gravity test (8.92 for clad, 9.53 for the 40% silver.)

About the only way i could see this as being a 40% silver no mint mark bicentenial would be it it was one of the coins from the one or two display sets of coins that were made for display at a PR event kicking off the bicentennial coins. They had a couple of sets of proof coins on display at the events and collectors realized that they didn't have mintmarks on them. Supposedly after the event all of th display coins were distroyed, but one or two of the no mintmark proof Ike dollars did manage to get out. I've never heard of any reports of the quarters and halves showing up. So if you REALLY believe this is a 40% silver, it really should be authenticated.

Originally Posted by Conder101

...About the only way i could see this as being a 40% silver no mint mark bicentenial would be...

I think he said it was a 1974, which would not be a bicentennial coin.

He did, but the 1974 coins were struck half way thru 1975, and all of the 40% silver Bicentennial coins were also struck in early to mid 1975 (There were no 1975 quarters.) So there might be a SLIGHT chance that a silver planchet used for the special display bicentennial coin may have somehow gotten in with the clad coinage blanks. this would really be a stretch though because the regular silver bicentennials were struck in San Francisco and the special display coins were struck in Philadelphia. A small number of silver planchets would have had to have been sent from CA to PA and then after the special coins were struck they have to lose track of the extra planchets?! Seems pretty far fetched Much more likely its just been silver plated.

My original line should have said "About the only way I could see this as being FROM a 40% silver bicentennial would be...."

Originally Posted by Conder101

He did, but the 1974 coins were struck half way thru 1975, and all of the 40% silver Bicentennial coins were also struck in early to mid 1975 (There were no 1975 quarters.) So there might be a SLIGHT chance that a silver planchet used for the special display bicentennial coin may have somehow gotten in with the clad coinage blanks. this would really be a stretch though because the regular silver bicentennials were struck in San Francisco and the special display coins were struck in Philadelphia. A small number of silver planchets would have had to have been sent from CA to PA and then after the special coins were struck they have to lose track of the extra planchets?! Seems pretty far fetched Much more likely its just been silver plated.

My original line should have said "About the only way I could see this as being FROM a 40% silver bicentennial would be...."

Ah, I understand now what you're saying. Yeah, it seems unlikely... it'd be hard to judge without seeing it in hand but plating is a real possibility.

Plating or a PROOF coin that has circulated enough or been exposed to elements that wore off the proof qualities?

If the edge shows NO cladding then that is a problem. A 40% silver coin is also clad, so there should be visible layers.

Originally Posted by JBK

If the edge shows NO cladding then that is a problem. A 40% silver coin is also clad, so there should be visible layers.

True. A LOT of people don't see it though.

If the edge shows NO cladding then that is a problem. A 40% silver coin is also clad, so there should be visible layers.

Good point, I was thinking about the 90% silver proof planchets but you're right they did not come untill later and the siver bicentennials were 40% so the edge would still most likely show clad separation. If the edge shows a soli color then it is almost certainly plated. The mint had no 90% silver plachets in 1974. So how about it, does it show a clad type edge?

While you bring up the most excellent point (that the 40% silver clad coins were also made of a sandwich of layers), I had completely forgotten this. So I went up to my coins and looked at several different 40% silver clad coins, and not one of them has layers that I can see, with my naked eye, at least. I looked at everything from silver bicentennial quarters, to silver Ikes, to even some 40% clad halves.

While you are correct (yes, my first check on this was the redbook), I am unsure as to whether or not the 40% silver clad coins have the sandwich effect on their sides. Does anyone else have coins to look at where they can confirm what I have found? Or am I out of my mind? (like usual,LOL)

I don't think you will ever see clad layers on 40% silver issues. They have an outer layer of a silver & copper alloy (.800 silver & .200 copper) bonded to an inner core of another silver and copper alloy (.209 silver & .791 copper).

So while the coin is still made of clad layers, they are both silver alloys. And the outer layer totally surrounds the inner core. They are not made like regular clad coinage so you do not see the typical layers.

You can usually see the core as a slightly darker, gray band on the edge of 40% silver halves. Interestingly, if you cut into the core, it shows a bright copper hue, so the graying must occur some time after blanking.

I've seen a lot of normal-weight, post-1964 quarters that looked like they didn't have a core. All of them were plated. That's probably the situation here.

Originally Posted by GDJMSP

I don't think you will ever see clad layers on 40% silver issues. They have an outer layer of a silver & copper alloy (.800 silver & .200 copper) bonded to an inner core of another silver and copper alloy (.209 silver & .791 copper).

So while the coin is still made of clad layers, they are both silver alloys. And the outer layer totally surrounds the inner core. They are not made like regular clad coinage so you do not see the typical layers.

Originally Posted by mikediamond

I've seen a lot of normal-weight, post-1964 quarters that looked like they didn't have a core. All of them were plated. That's probably the situation here.

Mike -

There are plenty of cases where a post '64 quarter, half or dime do not show the copper core and the coins are not plated. It is simply a case of the outer clad layer being pushed down over the edge and covering the copper core.