1965 Silver Quarter? No, but what is it?

True and if they made lets say 20 of them, you've got 50 bucks.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Plus if they intent was to try and pass it off as a 1965 silver error. Some one unsuspecting could have fallen for it.

 

I guess if you already have the mold it would be pretty easy to make them, then it could be a money making hobby. The only reason I check coins is for something special. Most people don't even look.

 

The heat of the dryer doesn't need to be hot enough to melt copper into a liquid.
If it is in the dryer long enough, it will cause the details to become mushy. There are hundreds of photos of dryer coins and almost all of them have mushy details.
While this coin could be counterfeit, if it is the same size as a quarter and made out of lead it will weigh almost 7 grams. So it's not lead.

 

For sure not lead and that is somewhat obvious by the lack of oxidization, however tin would have a pretty similar density to copper nickel.

 

I don't think that tin would be cost effective.
Tin is $9.46 a pound. Copper is $2.91 a pound. I believe tin is ruled out.

Aluminum
USD/lb
0.96
Copper
USD/lb
2.91

Lead
USD/lb
1.11

Nickel
USD/lb
4.78

Tin
USD/lb
9.46

Zinc
USD/lb
1.43

 

That presuming the coin was made recently. But 1994 ppp was $2, though not much of a gain. Or, the coin is purely made to look like an error. I guess you could cut it open?

 

I recently found a strange 1965 quarter as well. I took it to a coin shop and they analyzed it..52.7% Tin, 43.3% Lead, 1.7% Gallium, 1.1% Platinum, .93% Copper, .26% Zinc. Any idea of what this is?

 

First, welcome to the neighborhood! Would you mind starting a new thread and posting photos of your coin? TIA! ~ Chris

 

Coin shop is wrong. Analyzer was wrong. Or that was the previous foreign coin analyzed.
There's no lead and tin, even in a counterfeit. Platinum? Ahahaha. OK.
1965 is very common. It's mostly copper.

 

You must of paid a hefty amount to have it analyzed.
That's not a free service from what I know. Especially with the results.

 

Well let's see some photos, and since they analyzed it they must have weighed it as well. If it weighs correctly, it's going to be a normal clad quarter as it is difficult to
get the weights correct (if the size is correct) when you change metals.
The weight is always the easiest thing (and one of the most important)
things to do if you have a question about a coin. Always weigh it on an accurate scale. That can often answer many questions and end the discussion before it even starts.

 

In 1965 the mint was making the transition from silver . I have heard that some experimental pieces were made from different types of metal . Maybe this was what someone was trying to duplicate and may explain why the letters looks so mushy.

 

I never heard of that. In 1965 it was either transitional silver planchets or Clad over Copper planchets.. There was no need for "experimental" anything at that time.

 

I highly doubt if you have heard of everything even if you may think you have . They experimented with 17 different types of metal in 1965 for the quarter coins before coming up with the clad metal they are still using. This knowledge can be found on the internet.

 

Wow.. You must be the smartest dude in all of CoinTalk!

 

He is right they did have testing with various alloys/compositions leading up to the changeover to clad.

As for the analyzed quarter, sounds like a counterfeit, although the platinum content is odd. Contaminated jewelers melting crucible maybe that was used for the melt?

 

Ok. If you know that it is true then I would like to see the information. I'm not doubting you I just want to learn something new just like everyone else.

 

Sorry it took so long, had to go track down some source material. Found what I was looking for in:

HEARINGS | BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND CURRENCY, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES EIGHTY-NINTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION O H.R. 8746 (Superseded by H.R. 8926) A BILL TO PROVIDE FOR THE COINAGE OF THE UNITED STATES (Coinage Act of 1965)

It discusses the different potential materials (P 183-191)

Then in Appendix D-5 it discusses tests of blanking, upsetting, and coining 10 different compositions. The results are summarized and pictures of the different struck pieces next to a regular 90% silver quarter are shown.

The materials were:
75 Copper - 25 Nickel
Cupronickel - Copper (the selected coppernickel clad composition)
Multilayer Composite 50 Silver - 50 Copper
Coin Silver - Copper Multilayer Composite
Columbium, Vendor I
Columbium, Vendor II
Zirconium
Monel
95% Nickel-5% Silicon with magnetic core (bright annealed after upsetting)
Type 301 Stainless Steel, Vendor I
Type 301 Stainless Steel, Vendor II
Type 302 Stainless Steel
and the conclusions are on page 403

If you want to see it all for yourself this is a PDF link
https://books.googleusercontent.com...BBlWKoqmD_DAC8Uqrx5hd1JnqMCQ_UaBcu8zlfPinM4Gd

 

No problem!
I can use some good information as such.