Hey guys, I want to pass on something I heard this last weekend. I was discussing why so few Peace dollars have nice toning, but many Morgans do. One factor was familiar - Morgans tended to sit around in bags longer. But one comment totally caught me by surprise. One old-timer (a man of much credibility) posited that the newer steam presses ran on natural gas, but the older steam presses used coal. Coal-fired boilers tended to put more sulfur in the air (both as various gases and particulates), so the older coins were exposed to trace amounts of sulfur during the minting process; thus, the older coins tend to tone more. Comments ?
Interesting. I never thought of it before. But didn't they have standard city electricity by the time the Peace Dollars were minted? Guy~
Fascinating theory. Not sure I buy it, otherwise you'd see Seated Dollars with toning like Morgans and you don't.
The problem with that hypothesis is that the coins did not stay in that environment for very long. Soon after minting they are bagged up and shipped out. So unless the minting environment left a suflur rich residue on the struck coins prior to being moved, there would be no way that it could impart toning on the coin. I doubt very much that a sulfur rich residue ended up on the coins from the ambient environment of the minting rooms. But then again, I wasn't there to see the conditions or industrial set up of US mint in the 19th century.
That is an interesting theory. I'm not really sure how big of an effect that could have played though. Before 1901 the Mints used wood burning furnaces to anneal all the planchets (Which also give off sulfur), *in 1901 they switched to gas furnaces. So you would expect there to be a difference in toning between pre and post 1901 Morgans, but I don't believe that's the case. There are a bunch of theories, imo storage is probably one of the biggest factors. Wayne Miller, in his book The Morgan and Peace dollar Textbook, states there is some evidence that the acid bath given to the planchets after annealing was more concentrated for Peace dollars then it was for Morgan dollars, and this may have played a factor in deterring toning. Doug will come along soon and give us his drawings , I believe they took like this, /\/\/\/\/\/ -Which I believe is a definite factor in the toning process.
Peace dollars are less likely to tone,due to the fact that in 1921 the mint used the same process as they did on the walking liberty's,it was to acid dip the planchettes before striking,which helped to seal the metal content,to preserve the life of the coin in circulation.,so it depends on the strength of the solution used in this "acid bath" as to which ones are more likely or less likely to tone.
Well, sort of. I completely agree the switch from coal to gas AT THE MINT had little to do with it. However, they were far from the only one to switch. As a for-instance, I have seen a picture of Pittsburgh, Pa main street with the street lights on at noon on a bright sunny day by necessity (~1915). Maybe that is an extreme example, but Pittsburgh is far from the only place that used to have smog/air polution problems. Even my little home town noticeably cleaned up when the local railroads got rid of the steam engines for diesels. I know that does not correlate to the Peace/Morgan toning timing, but I am positive that the "toning" from the early twentieth century was much more significant that it is today.
If I had to guess, the difference in toning between Morgans and Peace dollars has to do with planchet preparation (wash) and storage. However, I've not read/heard anything authoritative on the topic...Mike
While I agree, I think that the biggest cure for toning was the advent of air conditioning. Can you imagine those atmosheric conditions in combination with heat and humidity. The coins did stand a chance IMO.
That will give them an idea of what I am talking about - particularly the top one. Thank you krispy. That being said, the one I saw was actually worse. You actually had problems seeing across the street
Sure you have, you just don't recognize it as such. To understand why certain series of coins tone the way they do all you have to do is look at them. Toning is caused by a myriad of things, but there are 3 universal basics - 1 the type of luster a coin has; 2 - environmental conditions; and 3 storage. Environmental conditions are never a constant, they change continuously based on a variety of factors. Storage can be a constant but seldom is. And the type of luster is only a constant among individual series, but even then it varies by degree for one coin of the same series may have more, or deeper, luster than another. But for the most part is is the same. And it is also true that one given series may have a very similar type of luster to another series. And if they do then it is expected for those series to tone in similar manners - and they do. Like I said, all you have to do is look at them to see this. It's been a few years, but during one of the past discussions of this subject one of the forum members took the time to make a series of micrographs of the various series of coins and posted them here on the forum to illustrate the different types of luster that each has. I can't recall exactly who it was that did this, I'm thinking it was Jim or Mark but can't say for sure. perhaps if they read this they will speak up so we can find that thread again. But the outcome was that what I am saying is true. Even they were surpised at what the pictures showed, meaning the different types, or depths, if you prefer to think of it that way, of luster that each series has, and its similarity, or lack of similarity, to other series. This is what determines the proclivity to toning, and the kind of toning, that each series typically has.
