Looks like a normal quarter with 35 years worth of wear and abuse.
No cents in 1966 had a mint mark, so that is normal. Weak letters on the reverse is nothing special either. Could be 52 years of wear, or they...
Nah, that is just badly damaged.
That is what a nice circulated war nickel is supposed to look like. 73 years of patina!
Not a real quarter, note on the obverse it says "close quarters".
If that is the actual color of the coin, it looks like it has been plated.
It is in a little rough shape, but still worth the silver value. I think that is just a little over a dollar at the present.
It looks coppery on the lettering and date on the obverse. I don't believe a cent with the copper plating missing should be shiny, all I have...
Yup, like CoinCorgi pointed out, 1963 to 1982 cents were brass.
The coin is probably just slightly heavy. It would only have to be .16 over to round up to the 12 grams, this would still be within mint tolerance.
Sure, lots of them. Quality control was not very good in some of the private mints making colonials. As long as they would circulate there was...
It is worth a quarter, just a normal quarter that has been painted. If painting made them valuable everyone would be painting their quarters!
So I take it that you now concede that it is just glue?
That would be a fake trade dollar. Genuine ones were not minted until 1873 so the date is a dead giveaway.
With the new better pictures, 100% no doubt, certain, glue, not an error. Soak it in acetone, don't dab at it, it won't hurt it. Positively, glue.
Try soaking the coin in acetone, I suspect the "error" will disappear. The acetone will not harm the coin.
Yes, zinc deterioration beneath the copper plating.
Cheap souvenir type fake coin. These are sold in tourist shops in Civil War historic areas.
You should definitely spend your money and have this rare one of a kind error authenticated!
Nothing in this post makes any sense whatsoever.
Separate names with a comma.
