Yours is a coin which does not justify the micro-level work Insider hinted at; it needs to be at least MS67 to have any kind of significant value. So, dipping copper. I'm just going to offer one single link which can be the basis for anything you want to do to any coin, and a lengthy commentary after with a little less meat than previously planned. Go here, read everything, and use it as the basis for further research: http://www.metaldetectingworld.com/cleaning_preservation_coin.shtml I'm hoping that a site designed to help those whose concentration is in coins which are heavily-corroded by nature will engender the proper perspective regarding what you should and shouldn't do with coins that aren't. You will learn just about all you need to know about cleaning coins, and how you apply that knowledge is up to you. There is no altruistic reason to reduce an oxidized copper coin from Brown to Red (which is what we're frankly talking about here, unless you're unsophisticated-enough to consider dipping as a "cleaning" operation for crud on a copper coin), only self-centered ones. The process does not help the coin, and whether you like it or not the coins are not here for your selfish purposes. Whatever you do to the coin, unless you melt it into a puddle it will survive you and be owned by another. And another, and another after that. Anyone who's ever owned a patinated Ancient knows that Nature always wins. Eventually, unless you encase a Red copper in impermeable material of some sort, it will oxidize. You can personally preserve it during its' time in your ownership, but down the road someone will care less and oxygen will have its' way. Slabs help, but one has to wonder why, given that the technology is so readily available, TPG's haven't chosen to hermetically seal them....even plastic is porous to one extent or another. We can start contemplating Red copper as something with lasting value when we swing back to approving of permanent coin coatings which prevent oxidation. For the moment, Red copper is a form of Russian Roulette, which is why I don't like the market for Red copper. _________________________________________________________________ Check this out: (Credit for this image is offered both to the original shown copyright holder and KaiserScience, a wonderful website which anyone interested in science for the non-scientist ought to know about) That's the Reactivity Series, a scale of the general reactivity of metals. For our general purposes, metals lower on the scale oxidize less-readily than those above, and those above are useful in stealing the oxygen which has caused what we want to remove from where it's currently living on a metal below. Note Aluminum's position on the scale; it's why you use it in electrolysis. Aluminum is quite willing to grab random stuff from other metals. It's also why copper can be reduced with relative ease; it takes quite a while for that copper roof to turn green, and chances are the Cent you're looking at is only currently involved with oxygen as a corrosive agent. We've talked about reducing copper before, methods involving both hydrogen and carbon, and if you're paying attention you should already know that reducing it isn't a problem. Keeping it reduced, however, is kind of a different animal. When you expose the heated copper sheet to hydrogen gas, it is immediately reduced (the oxygen combined with the copper is removed because the hydrogen wants it more). But the moment you remove the hydrogen, the still-hot copper goes right back to copper oxide because copper oxidizes far faster when hot. And unfortunately, it has to be hot to be reduced. That's the "devil in the details" for turning Brown copper Red. Or, um, one of them. Another devil in the details is, your copper Cent isn't pure copper. It's brass, alloyed with tin and zinc. An alloy, by nature, isn't a chemical combination; it's a cake mix well-beaten in the bowl. But how well-beaten is it, actually? Not always that well.... And zinc and tin do different things when oxidized than copper does. Further, they're not so easy to reduce as copper (note their positions on the Reactivity Scale), and are difficult to reduce by more than atoms at a time. That kinda interferes with keeping your Cent whole, when the only way to reduce part of it is to remove atoms and redeposit them onto the cathode.... Speaking of interference, I think that's why copper tones into nice colors sometimes - thin-film interference involving the tin and zinc components. It has nothing to do with the copper itself, and I suspect poorer alloy compositions tone more nicely than better ones. All of this would be pretty easy if the coin were pure copper. Reduce it, quench it quickly in something unlikely to offer it oxygen during the process (Google "Therminol" and learn from there), and there's your Red cent. There's still a lot of devils in those details, and I'm unwilling to share them.... But all the same, the zinc and tin involved are as likely to screw the process up as not, no two Cents have perfectly similar compositions, you won't know if it works until afterward, and sometimes the finest of technique not only fails but further damages the coin. In summation: Yeah, you can turn a Brown Cent into a Red Cent. It probably won't stay that way, and you don't get to decide if it works or not.
Just some observations. If you understand anything about coins, especially copper coins, the mere fact that such a huge number of older Red copper coins even exists in cleanly graded slabs proves that it is possible to turn a RB or BN cent RD. How does it "prove" anything ? Because reason proves it. It's amazing what you can do with the power of reason. Of course there are always those who say - show me, show me pictures, I'll not believe it unless I see with my own eyes. Well just as an example, here's a picture - Do you believe it ? No of course you don't. Why ? Because you "know" that it's a photo- shopped picture. So why am I bothering to post that picture ? I would think that would be obvious, what good would it do to show you before and after pictures of BN cents being turned RD - when you know things like that picture above can be done ? So rather obviously before and after pictures wouldn't "prove" anything. And in that same vein consider this, there are countless numbers of things that you personally have never seen with your eyes - and yet you believe those things to be true ? Why is that ? Now you'll come up with all sorts of answers to justify your belief. But in the end it all boils down to one simple thing, you believe it because you want to believe it, you are willing to believe it. And by the same token there a countless numbers of other things out there that you have not seen with your own eyes and you do not believe. And with your dying breath you'll claim that they are not true, cannot be true - and for no other reason than because you don't want to believe it. And even if somebody "proves" it to you, you still won't believe it. Years ago there were many people who refused to believe that coin doctors could successfully artificially tone coins in such a way that the TPGs would grade and slab those coins. Heck there are still people who say it can't be done. But then one day a guy came along and proved that he could do it. He not only proved he could do it to the coins, he proved could do it while the coins were in the slabs. He took before and after pictures. Some believe that, others did not. Then some of those coins were available for in hand viewing at coin shows - more became believers. Others did not. That's my point, it doesn't matter what the proof is. The proof can be legion, but if you don't want to believe it, you're not going to. This concept, this idea is so pervasive that the first person to notice it and then document in writing that he noticed it, did so over 2000 years ago - his name was Julius Caesar. Today, the concept is still so pervasive that they even have a name for it - it's called denial. And a great many people suffer from it, and about a great many things. And almost without exception those who suffer from denial, claim that they are not suffering from denial at all. Others who look at them can see that they plainly are, but they themselves still deny it. They will even go so far to say that it is not them, but everybody else who is wrong. But then that's what denial is. It is the refusal to acknowledge that you could be wrong about something. That you believe something that just isn't true. Well folks, time and time again throughout recorded history we, as a species, have found that many of the things that we believed - just weren't true, and never were. THAT is an observation that perhaps we should pay attention to.
Hmm. I see at least one glaring error -- reducing anything with CO2 is quite a trick. (You can make carbon trioxide, but you really have to work at it, and it doesn't keep.) I'm guessing they meant CO (carbon monoxide)?
Yeah, I think so. CO is mentioned as a potential reducer for copper oxide, which makes more sense, but I never explored it. This stuff is....fun enough as it is without using carbon monoxide as a tool in the process. I'll stick to pure carbon, thank you. I grabbed the pic because it was nice and clear, and on a site I like. Never figured they'd get the nomenclature wrong.
I tried to use Google to get the Latin translatation of "Do not dip copper coins". It gave me "Non attingendi dipundio." Running that back through Google Translate, it literally means: "Not attaining pennies?" LOL. Maybe someone who actually took high school Latin can help. Edit: how about: "Numquam immergunt aercus denarios" or "Numquam mundi tuo coins nisi antiquos"?
What a bunch of chemistry wimps. That said, do NOT mix chlorine bleach and Lysol toilet bowl cleaner (both are used SEPARATELY in cleaning photographic paper processors - did I mention SEPARATELY?). The combination yields a mustard (colored) gas. Yep, that one - the World War I gasmask one.
Chlorine. Not mustard gas, but a WWI favorite. Nasty, foul stuff. Great disinfectant, but for heaven's sake keep it away from your coins.
We only had one employee get a snootfull. He didn't go horizontal, but it got close. Woozy on steroids.
Just to make sure no one here is misled. Many Lincoln/IHC collectors like BU "red" coins. IMO, most of them could not tell an original red mint state coin from a processed or cleaned coin. "Micro" whizzing was not detected by TPGS's for years. My point is this: A 1911, 1916, 1920, and 1927 cent that may be "worthless" in the real world (unless it is high MS) is a treasure to many. Buff it up and it will be more treasured. ALL COINS are candidates that "justify" being altered; whether it is the sophisticated coin doctor or the dealer I knew that cleaned all his copper with toothpaste to make them bright and "worth" more to the ignorant. Our personal goal should be to learn what original coins look like. Then, when we buy a processed coin because it is cheap or we wish to "play" with it - we made an informed choice.