I just opened a roll of nickels and pulled out a couple of 2005 P Lewis & Clark nickels but one looks like a normal nickel but the other looks like it is bronze, are both normal or is the bronze one an error?
Photo? Maybe a clad layer kaput, maybe cleaning/contamination/really bad AT/really bad NT.... who knows? Maybe a miniature bronze Bust that got flattened?
Hard to say with out pictures, but I'd be leaning towards toning. Depending on how it looks it may even be a coin that spent some time in dirt, but like I said with out pictures its impossible to tell. and @charley clad layer on a nickel?
At the time, some clowns were dipping them and trying to pass them off as missing clad layer. There were also dingbats coating them and claiming special gold issue.
2005 p Jefferson nickels were minted in Regular MS , Satin MS for mint sets,and proofs. The west ward serie in the proof mint set blue box 99.999 % toned gold! Worse yet variegated toning. Anyone who never removed those proof/ satin nickels in their air tights from those mint blue boxes now have gold nickels. The satin images did tone do today the rinse agents used to was the blanks.
Lewis & Clark = 2004 Your 2005’s are showing typical toning. The one on the right is showing some signs of grease affecting the surface finish as well. Different vin appearance but routine. No premium as a result.
5 cents.... considering it cost uncle sam 7 cents to mint it. And no one is a production piece for normal circulation the other a satin finish from mint sets. Still only a nickel
