It is an acid that will etch the coin to a point where you may be able to see a date. It is used mostly on Buffalo Nickels but should only be used as a last resort if the coin is a failure in all other ways. It's just used to make a date appear if it's possible to do so. Once used the coin becomes useless unless it's a rare date or something like a 1918/7 Buffalo. If done properly it will still allow for some value to a rare nickel.
Thank you.. I recall reading that somewhere, now that you mention it.. Since we're on the Buffalo subject, I have one with no date that matches a rare coin. On that rare coin, there's a doubling, or a cud under the Indians chin. The one I have has the same error, and from what I studied; that's the only year with that particular error. Now, with that said, even if there were proof such as that; would it be enough to decide? Or is it like rule #1 that a date must be legible? Thank you all for your help. Its nice to finally have some clarity!
You can get a date on a nickel with white vinegar and a little hydrogen peroxide. But the coin will be whiter. (And acid etched damaged. But with this coin it doesn't matter.) This coin could have been in circulation for 100 years. I doubt there's anything valuable under there.
I have no problem with etching these coins. They still have value because they are traceable to that date. You won't send them to a big auction house, but I have seen them sell on eBay to someone who wants that date. Look up this guy http://www.ebay.com/usr/buffaloreincarnations?_trksid=p2053788.m1543.l2754
You are interchanging two completely different things here. Doubling and a cud are two different critters. Cuds form at the rim of a coin exclusively. But if there is no date at all, these identifiers become pretty much useless. I'm not up on Buffalo nickels as much as I'd like to be , but a good source for info would be Brians Variety Coins here on the internet. Brian Ribar specializes in nickels.
I think longer than that. I heard you could still find 19th century issues in change in the 1960's. Nickels were the workhorse coin of the masses, nothing were worn more than these in my experience.
Steven Musil, who advertises in Numismatic News is a good confirmation of this. Nearly 90% of what he offers are problem coins such as mentioned above. He must be doing well as he always takes out full page ads and that's not cheap anymore.
I'm not aware of any rare variety of buffalo nickel where there is doubling or a cud under the chin. There are examples with strong die clashmarks under the chin but that can be found on many different dates and probably exists on all date/mint combinations. It's like the "Bugs Bunny" Franklin half dollars, everyone knows about the 1955, but it exists on all date/mints.
