Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="Conder101, post: 3035380, member: 66"]Talking about thickness on the struck coin is an exercise in futility. Most people try to judge the thickness of a coin by looking at the edge. But the apparent thickness of the edge tends to be a function of how well struck the coin is. The stronger or better the strike the more the rims fill in the thicker the edge of the coin. Another problem is if you will take coin and rotated around you'll notice quite frequently that the edge is not the same thickness all the way around the coin. Also the better the strike the more the devices fill and so they also appear to be thicker if you measured with a caliper at specific locations on the coin. A stronger strike will force the fields of the dies closer together so areas measured field to field will be thinner on a well struck coin that on a poorly struck coin. Taken altogether it's really not possible to make a thickness comparison between struck coins. Where thickness variations would show would be on the thickness of the blanks, not the planchets, the blanks. Even there you have problems due to mint tolerance ranges a blank at the low end of the tolerance will be thinner than a blank at the high-end of the tolerance. And you going to have real problems trying to tell a blank from one year from the blank of another year so you can make your comparison.[/QUOTE]