Are copper-plated zinc cents considered "clad?"

Discussion in 'Coin Chat' started by JCro57, Sep 3, 2018.

  1. JCro57

    JCro57 Making Errors Great Again

    Since clad is defined as "multiple individual layers of metal bonded together," aren't copper-coated zinc cents technically clad?

    There are only two other options: (1) purely one metal, as were early 100% copper large and half cents and (2) alloy coins, where two or more metals are melted and fused together like nickels, small cents up to midway 1982, and gold/silver coins.

    I know most people don't think of them as "clad," but tecnically they are, correct?
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. rickmp

    rickmp Frequently flatulent.

    No.
    Cents are copper plated zinc.
    Dimes, quarters, and half dollars are clad.
    The processes of plating and cladding are different.
    A simple Google search will help you know the difference.
     
  4. JCro57

    JCro57 Making Errors Great Again

    I see. So it is the process by which the metal is applied to make the multiple layers that makes all the difference. (I know those others are clad, and I found different answers doing a google search.) Thus the same reasoning applies that I can't simply dip a nickel in melted aluminum and now say it is "clad." Gotcha. Many thanks, Rick. I will send you a bottle of beano to hopefully help your frequent flatulence as it must be terribly embarrassing while at coin shows.
     
  5. alurid

    alurid Well-Known Member

    I think that they are, But the word "Clad or Cladding" seems to take on a different
    meaning when used in the Numistmatic world. So does the word "Plating".
    "Copper Coated Zinc" is a more realistic term for the cents being produced today. Plating has an inference of Thickness. As in " the US Consitution is Clad with Iron Plating, that is why it is called "Old Ironsides".
    MM's are candy-coated chocolate , and that coating is thicker than the copper on a Plated cent.
    The Nomenclature is in place, it may not be correct. And I don't think it will ever be changed. No one would ever be able to overcome the "Thickness" you would have to deal with to change such a thing.
     
    JCro57 likes this.
  6. JCro57

    JCro57 Making Errors Great Again

    You write very clearly. Great response.
     
    alurid likes this.
  7. rickmp

    rickmp Frequently flatulent.

    You're a just wonderful ray of sunshine this morning.
     
    JCro57 likes this.
  8. JCro57

    JCro57 Making Errors Great Again

    Thanks, my friend! Are you a current or former TPG grader?
     
  9. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    Partially. It is also the thickness of the outer layer of metal, combined with the process of application.

    It's kinda like the difference between gold plated and gold filled. Plating is very, very, thin - so thin that it almost defies measurement - and applied by chemical or electrochemical means. While filled is rather thick and applied by pressure bonding. And in the jewelry trade they have very specific and well defined measurements that can also be used to separate one from the other.

    These terms are so well defined that they are even legally binding.
     
    alurid and JCro57 like this.
  10. green18

    green18 Unknown member Sweet on Commemorative Coins Supporter

    I don't think they're clad.........they're copper coated zinc. The nature of clad coins is a totally different process.
     
    JCro57 likes this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page