1965 Quarter. How rare? Metal shrapnel in center of reverse

View attachment 1198320 View attachment 1198321 View attachment 1198322 View attachment 1198320 View attachment 1198320 View attachment 1198326 View attachment 1198329 View attachment 1198321

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

First of all it is not struck on copper. It's a normal clad quarter. Clad is Cupro-Nickel. 75% Copper and 25% Nickel. Environmental Damage is what occurs when it's exposed to the elements for a very long time.

 

How can I vote ‘None of the choices ‘?
And who thinks it’s an error?

 

What about the shrapnel mestal piece in reverse

Like i said I was just trying to figure out whether or not it was error

 

Not an error - that 'shrapnel' piece is
probably part of the badly environmentally
damaged surface event - it looks like it was
over the damaged surfaces, and would have
been the same dark copper color as the rest
of the surfaces if it had been there when minted.

 

Looks like a nickel I found on the shore of the Potomac river one time. What with all the pollutants in the river it was no wonder it looked the worse for a couple of years on the shore.

 

Whoever voted in your poll please ignore them.
All choices are incorrect.

 

When I was a kid I had a metal detector and the majority of coins I used to dig out of the lawns looked just like this quarter.

 

Where did the photos go

 

Oops! The garbage truck just left.

 

No pictures, only links. I thought there would be pictures...