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. :headbang:

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

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

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.

 

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...."

 

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.

 

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

 

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)

 

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.

 

That's another possible scenario, but it happens less often than most people think. Think about it. The number of quarters with the core fully obscured by the "bottom" clad layer smeared over the edge should be greatly outnumbered by the number of quarters with the core almost obscured. That is to say, a quarter with just a thin band of copper visible. The fact is that you almost never see any of these (I've seen exactly one).

 

I have not examined closely any 1976 40% coins lately, but my experience with 40% half doillars is that they clearly show the layers. This has usually been on circulated coins or ones that have toned, so in theory a brand new one might be harder to see.

 

I all...thanks for the replies!! Sorry I haven't gotten back sooner, away from the PC.
Here is the latest update I can give:

Took the quarter to two jewelery stores to have them weigh it...5.80 grams at both.

Then to the coin shops. Two out of the three offered me 10 bucks for it (guess the price has doubled in 15 yrs., lol) but not really giving me a reason why the wanted to buy it from me. :headbang:

The third shop owner was a bit different. Weighed it in at 5.8 grams, checked it with his loop & then under the microscope. His response, and I will quote.....

"I'll be d*mned, this sucker is 40% silver, just like you thought. I wouldn't believe it if not seeing it for myself. Best get it to a grading service & get it authenticated."

A little more chatting & his response of, "I don't even want to offend you with what I could offer to purchase this from you. Get it authenticated & let me know how it works out."


OK guys, which TPC. I am leaning towards PCGS. The coin has been circulated though. Still in F/EF condition....of course I could be wrong, lol.

Cheers

 

I agree

The 40 % coin have a gray band to them and look different then 90% and reg copper clad IMO

 

Oooops, fat fingers...ment TPG.

Any suggestions as to which to go with for authenticity....