2000 Quarter-rounded edge no ribbing

Not a dryer coin. Closest description I can find is "off metal" "coreless". What do you think? Diameter is .007 smaller than stock. I don't think it ever had edge reeding. Mint? http://www.error-ref.com/wrong_stk_correct_comp___87-p_nick_on_clad_qtr_/

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Dryer quarter most likely but definitely damaged. The reeding along with some of the design on the edge was worn off. You can still see the copper/ clad composition on the edge. Sorry!

 

https://www.coincommunity.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=143863
Not really like a dryer coin at all. Check this site.

 

It is called reeding. It's just a damaged quarter. Not a Mint Error.

 

I was a machinist. I could of called it a knurl. LOL

 

The diameter is only .007 smaller then that of a normal quarter. How do you completely remove the REEDING with only .0035 per side. The edge markings go obverse to reverse not circular.

 

Depth of reeding is very very minute and the damage likely pressed the metal out and increased its size a bit

 

The only way I know of to increase diameter on a round object is to knurl, weld or metal spray. You could also flatten the center to grow the diameter. but none of these things seem to have been done here. I appreciate your comments. Thanks for checking it out.

 

It's still damage.

 

You win.

 

Looks like it had a reeded edge - damage/altered

 

Damaged on all three sides

 

Damage!

 

If you ignore the edge for a minute, and look closely at your quarter in the area outside of the yellow circle as indicated below.


- outside of the yellow circle you can see a consistent damage of the surface including the letters. Wear is heavier on the edge, and becomes less prominent as you move away from the edge.
- The raised edge, which exists on the reverse, is not really present on the obverse. Thus something wore it down, and only on one side.
- since the wear is heavy on the obverse and not the reverse and extends into the coins circle you have to conclude what ever wore it was possibly "concave" that wore away the edges the most and less so going into the circle of the coin (ignoring the coin itself rotation).
- The reverse was unaffected as the wear was on the edge going to the yellow circle. Thus the coin never was "flipped" to affect the reverse.
- exactly how this occurred .. we tend to think since it was laying on one side and circular that it was some machine where the quarter got stuck in. and had some type of rotating mechanism.

A dryer becomes an obvious scape-goat. Vertical dryer? front loading dryer? Commercial? Home? what brand, type, for how long, etc is all unknown as it's a generic term of a "dryer coin" based on the visual damage.

If you ever venture into commercial laundrymats you will hear coins circulating in the drums all day long. It's these situations where the coins, left in pockets, fall out, bounce around, and get past the bent and damaged lint traps that never get fixed 100%. My old home dryer too had coins get past the lint trap.

 

A quarter is large compared to a nickel, dime or cent. Quarters would normally "tumble" in dryers, compared to the smaller coinage which end up rotating between the two internal drums and get the pushed down, fat edge that you earlier referenced. The quarter is generally too large to get stuck between the two drums, thus tumbles.

Now, it could *not* have been a dryer. But probably some similar type of machine with some form of rotating mechanism.

per the above ....

see this @Mountain Man
https://www.cointalk.com/threads/1966-quarter.320371/#post-3140681



additional threads
https://www.cointalk.com/threads/dryer-coin-vs-spooned-coin.304963/

https://www.cointalk.com/threads/thoughts.330523/#post-3300893

 

FAARDE! That's good. I will quietly accept my punishment and work to control my rebellious ways. Not really! Thanks again. I'm learning.

 

It is all about thinking through a couple things:

(a) if you learn the minting process in detail you'll be able to think through how a coin could or could not get damaged while in the minting process.

(b) one has to accept that there are infinite ways a coin can get damaged. It's not a "why", but a "how" by looking at what is in front of you. Don't limit your thinking based upon what you know.

Think outside the box and never underestimate people ability of damaging or using coins for other purpose than money. After all, for some reason people collect coinage made for commerce instead of the coins designed and made for collecting. That's the first problem lol. Ever use one as a screwdriver or even to open the backside of a "coin battery" compartment ?

 

I had a U.S. Patent for a product I designed and manufactured for 16 years. I really do think outside of the box. Some times you have to take a hammer to that box to see if it will stand up to it's claims. Oh, I prefer a butter knife as a screwdriver. LOL
Thanks again!

 

I will investigate the coining process. Thanks.

 

I used to collect knives, even fine cutlery.

I've never defaulted to how the edge, if twisted from being used as a screwdriver, was a manufacturing defect/error versus damaged. And yet with coins people default to a manufacturing defect/error even though coins get used & abused far more than typical knives.