Error nickel, please identify

I have vice and a lot of nickels, so you're telling me by squeezing them together is gonna make them more valuable? It's worth 5 cents, the max any merchant would accept unless they claim they can't tell what it is and if its even real.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Some people like these types of coins that are made from two. This isn't just a vice job. I believe this is a U.S. Nickel and a Canadian Nickel put together. By definition, if it sells for more than a nickel, it has value.

 

By definition (mine), any fool who pays more than face value for it is a bidiot.

Chris

 

Who wants some magic beans?

 

5 cents is all it's potential value.

How can you say this is a Canadian and U.S. nickel as one when it's clearly two U.S. nickels that were smashed together in a vice. The actual nickel is the new design of Jefferson's mugshot while the impressed one on the obverse is that of the older mugshot.

PMD, no value except spending it as a nickel.

 

I said that because I believe that two coins were pieced together. A Canadian nickel was used as half ,due to the row of small dots you see. Where on a Jefferson Nickel ,new or old, do you have those along the rim. Those are however just off the rim of a Canadian nickel.

 

I think that it is just an illusion of seeing it in two dimensions. I'm quite sure that in hand, it is obviously a squeeze job. There is no way that the mint could have made this error. I'm not trying to say that the mint makes no errors, I am saying that it could not make this one.

 

Okay, this is probably the dumbest idea for an explanation ever, so here it goes. Someone viced Jefferson on the reverse after removing the image of the reverse, so just a backwards impression of Jefferson could be seen. Then they did the same to a different coin to make a negative image of Monticello on a coin, almost like a die. Then they could imprint the negative image onto the negative Jefferson head by vicing, giving a positive image of Monticello over a negative Jefferson. Well, there you have the dumb explanation!

 

Nice idea numis addict. If the metal of rispears10 coin was softer that a
nickel a die made from pressing a nickel into a softer metal will work. Is a
canadian nickel a softer metal than us nickel? I,ll like to know if rispears10
thinks the metal is right.

 

I have been reading this thread and I can not believe that a few folks thinks it may be a real mint error. someone said they can not see any sunken in and reversed letters. I can clearly see the backwards date of 1991 and the word trust. there is just no way that this could have been done at our US mints. one poster said it looked to be a Canadian nickel and a US nickel and that is also what I think it is. I can clearly see what looks like a seam going around the center part of the outer edge of this thing. It looks to have been sliced apart and another part glued onto it. as far as the side with the design , this simply had another nickel's obverse design pressed into it.

someone was probably just playing around with this thing because it is made to crude for a attempt at making a fake error coin.

 

Well someone could have repeatedly smashed nickles into a piece of wood. The initial impression would hopefully be deep enough to make a nickel lock into place, or at least rest there, so they could form fit it to be in the same position. That would replace the second nickle showing the negative Monticello and other reverse stuff. smash that on there, and that could work. Possibly it would have to be heated though. just a thought.

 

I think the beads are in too straight a line and spaced too closely together to be the beaded border from a Canadian nickel.

It looks to me like the figure of Jefferson has pressed down the Monticello. If you look a the reversed Jefferson and look at the part between the back of the neck and ponytail where it crosses Monticello you can see the neck and ponytail are pressed in and lower than the area between them.

And of course as someone else mentioned this does appear to be a 2006 and later reverse with the designers initials to the right of Monticello that has been mashed by a 2003 or earlier Jefferson obverse. So if it was to have been a mint error you would have to explain how dies or hubs used three years or more apart got together.