Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;rmpsrpms, post: 3000049, member: 31773&quot;]I never said that. What I said was that the person selling the coin might say that in order to create uncertainty.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>This is a common misconception, propagated by folks who either dip coins or condone dipping coins, or perhaps folks who own coins they know or suspect are dipped and want to believe they have not been damaged. Dipping leaves visible evidence that shows itself under a microscope. Even a single, quick, &quot;harmless&quot; dip does visible damage.</p><p><br /></p><p>edited to add: I must admit that I may not have as high a success rate with early Lincolns, as I have not studied them enough. The die preparation was different for these versus later years, and colors seem more variable. If I used my general criteria on them I would end up concluding that most of them have been altered. Of course this may be true, but I have not studied enough known-original coins to be sure.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in