I'm not good at telling if coins have been cleaned, but I'm guessing these have been either cleaned or dipped. Thanks
Well, with as many scratches as I see, and no browning anywhere, they appear to have been cleaned. For those coins to still be red with that much damage doesn't seem plausible to me, but I'm no expert.
that kind of funky orange comes from cleaning does not look normal. plus it is very shiny. when was a young boy I cleaned some cents with brasso brass cleaner. so I got to the know what a cleaned funky orange color looks like. I cringe now at the sight of it.
I think they've been dipped as well, I don't see the swirl marks that my cleaned Morgan has, and the other wheats I have that have been cleaned are either much lighter in color, almost a whiteish color, or have many scratches seen at certain angles in light. But I'm not positive.
Looks like it was in a rock tumbler..... :thumb: Just kidding... it was dipped and possibly polished.
The 1909 would be the one if any I'd consider to be lightly polished, thanks for the feedback everyone.
Without seeing them in hand I don't know. But let me put it you like this. 1 - Copper is the most reactive of our coinage metals, at least our older coinage metals. If air can get to the copper coin, it is going to tone and rather quickly. That is a given. And once they tone they are no longer mint red. 2 - Quality coin holders and proper storage methods that greatly slow down toning have only been in use for recent years. But let's stretch it and say they have been in use for say 50 years. 3 - There are tens of thousands of mint red copper coins that are 100-150 years old in NGC and PCGS slabs that are designated as mint red. Do I really need to say anything else ?
In other words Doug is saying is that it depends on whether or not the TPG feels like slabbing it that day or just calling details, maybe the grader has a high work load that day and he needs to move some coins through the queue, you're getting detailed at that point. Most coins out there have been dipped or cleaned or retoned, etc.
I assumed some of those old and still red cents were maybe the inner coins on an original roll. But I do not collect copper (yet), and have never opened or read much about copper rolls. But I would hypothesize that an untouched original roll from say 1909 may preserve some of that original red on the middle 50% of roll, along with other accidents of history that preserved coins. Is that idiotic of me? (I'm asking, as I really don't know if paper rolls slow down the chemical reaction with air.) So, if I were to get into collecting Lincoln cents, are you saying 99% of RD graded coins have been dipped? I guess even if you say that have been, as long as they are not harshly cleaned, I would be fine with that. I mean, even if I kept myself to only RB or brown coins, that wouldn't necessarily imply a coin has not been dipped. For all any of us know, they just toned again. I've been checking out this site lately http://indiancent.com/39-lincoln-cents. I've been looking for an affordable RED that I like, and he has a lot. If those coins have been dipped at some point, and PCGS/NGC were fine with it, and additionally CAC was fine with it, and I liked the detailed images of a particular coin, I would be comfortable buying it. Even knowing that you are basically telling me 100 year old coins that are RED basically imply they MUST have been cleaned at one point, I would still be comfortable. That is what I meant by market-acceptable, I guess. I didn't want the OP to go away thinking that a coin pegged as being "dipped" = harshly cleaned = worthless.
First of all, dipping coins (properly) has been perfectly acceptable by the numismatic community (and yes that includes the TPGs and CAC) for as long as dipping coins has been around. That has never changed, and I don't see any way it ever can change. That said, pretty much anybody who knows coins will agree that 80% or more of all older coins have been dipped at one time or another. Toning is inevitable, that is just a fact that must be accepted. What I said in my other post about storage methods applies to all coins. As for what you ask about paper rolls, yes it is possible. But, paper rolls did not even exist until around 1900. And paper rolls were not commonly used, by banks or anybody else, until around the 1930's. So you have to take the age of the coin into consideration if you want to use that possibility as an explanation for the coin not being toned. And even then, most coins that are stored in paper rolls do tone, the paper itself encourages the toning. Those coins stored in paper rolls that do not tone are the exception and not the rule. The point is, yes there are some examples of coins, and I mean all coins not just copper, that managed to avoid toning over the course of their lives for one reason or another. Usually it was nothing more than pure accident, because as I said earlier, storage methods that helped to prevent toning did not exist until recent years. A coin here and there might have been put into an old fashioned tin with a tight fitting lid, or a glass jar, and that may have kept those coins from toning. But how many examples like that does anybody really think could exist ? Sure there are a few, but very few. And definitely not enough to account for all of the untoned examples of older coins that exist today, and especially not copper. So the only logical conclusion is that those untoned coins had to have been dipped. There simply is no other explanation. However, many believe that copper cannot be successfully dipped. This is because dipping copper causes it to turn a pinkish color, an unnatural color. And that is true. But it is only true if you follow standard dipping practices. If you dilute the dip correctly then copper can be dipped successfully.
The color is not original, if I am interpreting the images correctly. This flat, dull, lusterless orange-pink is a dead ringer for a dipped copper coin and these are not market acceptable.
