1966 Dime - PMD or actual error?

What do you think of this dime? The reverse looks polished to me because it is so shiny. Is it actually an error?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I'd say post mint damage, but I say that a lot.
Calling Eduardo!! Ven Aqui mister!! @paddyman98 ......
??

 

You know what? Both of your answers were my first thoughts too! PMD and call for The Grand Error Master.

 

I've got a couple of ideas, and I'm not ready to say PMD just yet.

Do you have an accurate scale that can weigh to fractions of a gram? Give us the weight of the coin - if it is underweight, then it is most likely PMD (maybe an acid?).

If it is the correct weight, we can figure alternate theories. Most likely would be struck through grease, but that would be one of the most heavily greased dies I've ever seen.

I don't think it is polishing because I really don't see signs of mechanical abrasion, and the way that it behaves is inconsistent with grinding.

 

So? It could be PMD?

 

Yes. As noted in an earlier post: any subjection of the reverse to an acidic substance would be post-mint. I mean, the Mint would not use acid to produce this result, would it? But without the weight the jury is out for deliberation on PMD.

The weight is needed to see how close to a normal weight (or not) is actually there. And I agree it doesn’t look like struck through grease, but may be a heat damage result of some sort. There are some rim nicks on the obverse, and one could surmise they came from a holder used on the coin, but this is really pure speculation on my part. @physics-fan3.14

There are some odd design areas in the center, to the left of the torch that look actually attached, and I don’t have an answer as to how that might have been created.

 

Interesting theory. I noticed the obverse nicks you mentioned, but didn't consider that they could be related. However, the rim nicks correspond to the OF on the reverse - the region of least damage. Do you think perhaps a pair of tongs held the coin and it was subjected to a blowtorch on the reverse?

I would have expected heat damage to be more blob-like and dark/charred, which is why I didn't mention that. I suppose it may have been dipped afterwards to make it shiny.

FWIW - Roger Burdette says cupro-nickel dimes melt at about 2400 F. That's really hot!

 

The absence of the upraised rim of about 90% on the reverse would make it altered.

 

I can’t tell from the photos but I have this dime which is an error as noted on the slab label. It look a lot like the same but mine has a full rim on both sides of the coin.

 

So, Ed's correct again?? Oh Boy!

 

I was at capped die the first I saw it. An in hand inspection could change things.