Clouding on Proof Silver Coins

The product is marketed as being able to provide protective coating to prevent corrosion on coins, particularly copper coins. It does this by leaving an oily film on the coins. And Average Joe Collector probably uses it for that purpose.

However, there is another lesser known reason for it's use. Way back when it was still Blue Ribbon coin doctors figured out that when it was applied correctly (for their purposes) it could make a coin look like it deserved a grade much higher than it actually did deserve.

Ever see a mid to high MS grade copper coin toned that deep chocolate brown that so many collectors are fond of ? The ones where the luster gets that deep glossy or satiny look that cover the whole coin ? Well, that's what Blue Ribbon and or Coin Care, in the hands of a skilled coin doctor, can do to a coin had no luster whatsoever left on it - the ones that were toned to a flat chocolate brown.

And yes, a great many undeserving coins treated (doctored) in that manner have been given those higher grades by the TPGs because the treatment is usually not detected by most people. But, if and when the coin is run through the sniffers, the red flag pops up right away. Problem is the only coins run through the sniffers are those submitted under the Secure Plus grading tiers. All others are merely examined by eye. So the doctors get away with it most of the time with non being the wiser.

That's what Coin Care is used for.

 

Yes, it is one of the theories put forward by some, but it is only a theory. But when you consider everything that is known, it becomes a rather unlikely theory. For example, how much improper rinsing can there be ? For the rinsing to be improper it means they are doing it wrong, so how often do you think they would be doing it wrong ? Also consider how common haze on modern Proofs is - and by modern I mean from the late 60's on. It is extremely common, so common that it can be argued that it happens more often than not. Which would mean they doing things wrong more often than not. And that just isn't very likely because the haze issue is and always has been very well known because it is so common. So it is logical that the mint would have taken steps to correct it. However, it's been going on for over 50 years and it still happens - a whole lot of the time.

You also have to consider that the mint is constantly changing their rinse solutions as new products come out, as well as their rinse methodology, in an effort to either improve or speed things up. Throw that into the mix and it becomes even more unlikely that improper rinsing is causing the haze problem.

What is far more likely is that haze is nothing more than the beginning stages of toning. And not caused by anything done or not done by the mint. Why ? Because it happens pretty much all the time, and has for 50 years or so. Even though there have been a multitude of changes made in the rinsing processes over that period of time.

Then some will ask why did it change 50 years or so ago ? Why didn't it happen before that ? A valid question, but also one that has an answer - because that was about the same time when a huge change in packaging mint products came about. The change was from soft packaging to the hard plastic cases for Proof products. And that changed the way coins toned. And not only in the colors and depth of color produced, but the speed at which they were produced. With the hard packaging color came much more slowly and in different ways. This was because the new packaging helped protect the coins from the environment.

Yes it was similar but not the same. To see that all you have to do is look at them. Even small changes in the packaging produce different results in toning, and or the lack of it. And, you also have to consider the differences in the coins. And not just the alloy of the coins, but the luster of the coins. Morgan and Ikes have completely different kinds of luster. Each and every type of coin ever produced has its own unique type of luster. And it is the luster of each type of coin that determines the kind of toning those coins will have more than anything else. Two different types of coins, exactly identical packaging, kept in the exact same environment and stored in the exact same methods, you'll have two different kinds of toning.

 

All true Larry, but let's not forget the rest of the packaging as it can have a huge impact on toning. For example, look at these two links -

http://www.us-coin-values-advisor.com/images/GSA-Dollar-Holder.jpg

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/8d8AAOSwJcZWgKUP/s-l300.jpg

As I mentioned above, they are similar, yet they are different. To the best of my knowledge the plastic holders themselves really don't have much of an effect on the coins, but the rest of the packaging - that's your culprit right there.

 

Good question. Once it's detected, and if it's run through the sniffer it will be detected, they really don't have any choice but to body bag it.

The unknown is whether they would honor their guarantee. First of all, when a coin is resubmitted for re-grading under a new tier like that it is removed from the slab before it ever gets to the people doing the actual work. And I'm not really sure that the people doing the actual work would even know it was previously slabbed - if they did it would kind of defeat the purpose of re-grading. So for it get caught that it was an altered coin, and thus subject to the guarantee, it would probably only get caught on review. And from what I know of, once it was, they would honor their guarantee. The TPGs have always been good about that.

But, I'm making assumptions here. I have never heard of this scenario actually being played out. So about the only way to find out for sure would be to ask them.

 

I certainly think that is a big part of it. Coupled with the the differences in the alloys, and whatever the environment happens to be where the individual coins were kept. Those things have to play a part as well.

The outer hard plastic box is acrylic, and that's inert. And it's same with GSAs. The inner black material, certainly looks to be the same with GSAs. And it's not unheard of for GSA Morgans to be toned either. But the toning pattern on them, well, it's never the same as it is on the Ikes. At least I've never seen one that was. This leads me to believe that the inner black material is also inert.

The Ikes however, whether toned or just with haze, the pattern is always pretty much the same. The haze always starts at the outer edges, and is circular. And the toning always starts at the outer edges, and is circular - in the early and mid stages. Later on, yes it can cover pretty much the entire coin but those example are far outnumbered by those with the circular pattern. It's this more than anything else that's always convinced me that haze is nothing more the early stages of toning.

And also that there has to be something about the outer cardboard boxes that the Ikes came in because the GSA coins also have outer cardboard boxes and they don't tone in anywhere near the proportions that the Ikes do, or in the same patterns.

But bottom line, with any toning it's always going to be a combination of things.

 

But they do - they always do ! So that tells us it doesn't matter that the "leak" is farther away at 6 and 12.

I gotta say no. I get your reasoning, but the plastic is the same, acrylic is acrylic and it's all inert. The differences are the alloy and the cardboard - and the environment of course. But since they all tone the same pattern, I'm betting the environment only helps determine the colors - not the pattern.