2-1947 out of tolerance nickels

Discussion in 'Error Coins' started by 2manyhobbies, Sep 18, 2019.

  1. 2manyhobbies

    2manyhobbies Well-Known Member

    These two aren't seriously out of tolerance,But they are over the .194 that the mint uses for their nickels. I also seen somewhere that the Henning nickels for this year had a small anomaly above Monticello on the left. It appears that both do have an anomaly in that location. Most likely they aren't Hennings. I would like your thoughts! Thanks for your time. DSC01460.JPG DSC01463.JPG DSC01465.JPG DSC01469.JPG DSC01472.JPG DSC01474.JPG DSC01476.JPG DSC01477.JPG
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest

    to hide this ad.
  3. Burton Strauss III

    Burton Strauss III Supporter! Supporter

    Remember the mint tolerance is a 95% level... i.e. x +/- y 95% of the time.
    2manyhobbies likes this.
  4. desertgem

    desertgem MODERATOR Senior Errer Collecktor Moderator

    Things to consider: the mint value of weight is for an uncirculated coin, the coin weight tends to go up on circulated coins a very small amounts due to corrosion, dirt and grime~~ or down a certain amount due to wear in circulation. If a weighing is critical , even with a .001 balance such as you show, use a set of fresh batteries and also use the calibration weight to do a calibration first. It is still too small of a change for any value IMO, Jim
    2manyhobbies likes this.
  5. 2manyhobbies

    2manyhobbies Well-Known Member

    Thanks, I was just curious about them. I cropped the calibration weight out of the pics, I always set that on the scale first to make sure I get an accurate weight.
  6. Michael K

    Michael K Well-Known Member

    5.2 is heavy and while I don't see the dot marker in the first photo in the highlight
    photo it looks correct. At first I didn't think so as the Henning details are usually more mushy, but if 1947 is a Henning year, now I am unsure and these should be checked out.
    2manyhobbies likes this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page