Lacquered 1911 D- with hundreds of hours of xylene in the sun

Geez..I almost hate to admit but, I worked for a painting contractor for a number of years in my younger years and that second one I think would eat the penny alive. It literally does look like it's "boiling" the surface off. Don't think I'd try that one. Doesn't feel too great on the skin either.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Just right click on it and save it to file. If that doesn't work, I'll PM the file first chance (hopefully tomorrow). Have to catch some zzzz, now, getting a little weak upstairs. Hope you're not giving up on the experimenting for good, though, as you're a valuable resource now on the subject. But, it's OK by me if you take a little break. Hey, later guys, fading out. . . .

 

Eddie will like this one for the mornining. Harry- now that's what I am talking about. Real knowledge! I am definitely trying the baking soda and boiling water. I have a cheaper 1929 S that was lacquered and it won't bother me if it goes wrong.
Tom- I don't know about your other solutiion. Thad or Jim would have to talk about that. This post has gotten real fun now! encil::thumb::secret:

 

Wait where is my new avitar?

OH= there it is. I will play with that one for a while. ALL HAIL THE NWO! This is our future.

 

LOL..I've withdrawn the sulphate solution one. L one is still good though.

 

Yes get in line for your mandatory man made, oops I mean the ever so awful flying pig virus flu shot. Agreed Boss...our days are few.

Edit: whoops again...off the subject...coins only.. I beg forgiveness..

 

Here's after 15 min of baking soda and filtered boiling water and rinsed with very hot water. It looks duller to me. Not a huge change. Seems like it removed the obverse lacquer more than the reverse.

TOM- I can't comment on what you said. It will get me into detention- I have said too much.:kewl:

 

Yes I hear ya Boss. Maybe that's why I was always in the principal's office.....talking about coins I mean (or was it the lighter fluid?).

 

Boss, I love your new avatar!

Jim

 

Well- I have learned that from you Doug and I often give the disclaimer not to do (I.e., rose thorns and oil) without tons of experience. In this case it doesn't matter much IMHO as lacquered coins are lame and need the lacquer off. This dumb coin is awful stubborn. DMSO here we come.

 

Have to scoot, got a minor league bb game I'm obliged to attend and am late for. Just want to say, Boss, it's "official" now, you're looking good. So, I don't care if or when it might have to come down, I saw it, and justice was served! BTW, I think it is symbolic of the caution I've seen over and again in these threads that you bring to your use of these somewhat hazardous chemicals...so, it does have some practical relevance. Thanks again for the big laugh, and, needless to say, I'm feeling very honored, now! :hail:

 

Eddie- I have a rep to live up to: certified crazy! One of my close friends always says I am "a riddle wrapped in a rhyme". I keep this avitar a while. It is very fitting.

 

Well you're wrapped in something there! Glad we're enjoying. Gotsta scoot! :hail:

 

Other people however, especially those less well versed in the hobby, sometimes get the idea that playing around with your coins actually works and will improve them by reading threads like this. So occasionally it helps to present my point of view. Which by the way is pretty much the same point of view held by most experienced numismatists


Doug,
I apologize for coming down on you the way I did. I could of done better and I respect your opinion as I do most of the folks in here. It is of obvious value. I don't apologize for the main point though, that being that it can and is done every day by a whole lot of people in the hobby. I think it's very frustrating to know that methods are used but so shrouded in apparent secrecy. I really don't understand it. You have to pry the information, and even then, you don't get much. I think if the responses would be more like "I don't recommend this however....this is how it is done", type of answer, I think with that disclaimer, much, much more would be accomplished or "taught" so to speak, rather than the often obvious belittling of those that ask these questions, and after recieving that answer, I think that most people would then naturally ask, "Well... why don't you recommend it?", THEN, one could decide for his or her self, and as a result, a friendlier dialogue is established and I think all are served better. I do understand you trying to perhaps protect the beginner, but I really don't think any beginner is going to take a high dollar coin and try and clean it without knowing as much as they can on the subject before they try, certainly without practicing on lesser coins first.
Also, you keep using these "more experienced", "those less versed" and "playing around" (a reference to acting childish I guess) references that often, all by themselves, project condesention. I know I took it that way when I first came in here, and I gather, based on what I've read in other's responses, that I'm not the only one who sees it that way. I know you are much more "experienced" than I, very true, but it comes off seeming very pompous when one seemingly defends their idea more than the actualities. I've learned a lot in my relatively short time that I've started my interest in this hobby..for instance, I thought a proof was a really shiny coin, so I was pulling aside the shiniest, best conditioned ones (halfs) I could find. I got up to a pretty large pile of them before I realized what a proof actually was, seeing for myself it's obvious mirrored surface when I finally ran across one. I learned a lot of other things too and I imagine I will be forever learning so long as I am interested in the hobby.
Anyway, you're obviously free to defend yours and "most other more experienced" collectors positions, as am I. Hopefully though,we can all do it more respectfully. I'm probably the worst example of the respectful part but I am working on it. I just wish experienced minds were more open to different points of view. I am learning. What I haven't learned yet is this "No!..No!...No!..never!..ever!" concept. Maybe that's a good thing, not learning that I mean. Opinions are a very good thing but, sometimes "Facts...just the facts Maam", are all I'm after, then let me decide armed with those facts. There are ways to approach this "improving eye appeal" thing without all this mess, or so I would hope. It sure seems like the long way around, and I think a shorter route would be more beneficial to beginners. Have a good day.

 

Well Doug, I am on the BB phone so can't respond point by point but I do think you somewhat missed Tom's point. Your tone is even more of a turn off here and will actually cause the exact opposite response. When you introduce a counteintuitive concept (never clean coins which are dirty and old)to a beginner it needs to be gentle, not in all or nothing terms such as: "cold hard facts", "never, ever, waste of time, futility". A problem coin is not always a problem coin in my opinion. There are many hairlined coins toned over in holders and NO ONE on earth could detect that without the coin being dipped. Read "Coin Chemistry" by Mr White. I know you think he's a nut because he says toning is damage, but his arguements are based on pure science much more than anything any of us have said. He gives us an example of a beautifully toned Morgan Proof that the owner wanted blase white. The coin was problem free (they perceived the toning as a prob). Dipped and harilined everywhere. On this point I think you are unequivocally wrong (I can talk in absolutes too!). Years ago some bought a bunch of IHC and they were lacquered. Dealer paid next to nothing removed the lacquer and this revealed problem free high grade MS coins. Those WERE problem coins and were fixed. NCS fixes problem coins as well. I am sorry but do not agree with your points in this regard. Doug, I think you should provide links to old posts if you don't want to repost. For the record I agree with Tom and nice job on the humility factor.

 

Oooooo man, now it looks horrible. The baking soda was a bad idea, it's far too harsh on copper. IMO, the coin went from cleaned to harshly cleaned now.

 

How is baking soda too harsh on copper? wouldn't removing the lacquer be a priority because when it is gone the coin will retone?

 

The lighting is not good in the after photos and I agree it would retone later. It still didn't get off the lacquer entirely. Lacquer to me is just plain bad. I don't want it on any coin I have regardless of the outcome.