Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;ddddd, post: 7784254, member: 22377&quot;]And the answer is MS 65. You can argue the marks should have limited it to a 63 or a 64. I think anything in the 63-65 range is fair (do graders even pay that much attention on a 2004 nickel? <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie7" alt=":p" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />). </p><p><br /></p><p>The unusual thing is the error:</p><p><br /></p><p><a href="http://www.error-ref.com/improper-annealing/" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.error-ref.com/improper-annealing/" rel="nofollow">http://www.error-ref.com/improper-annealing/</a></p><p><br /></p><p>I liked the fact that it made the coin look &quot;bimetallic&quot; (an inner dark ring and an outer lighter ring). Some of these improperly annealed coins don&#039;t have as distinct of a look.</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1335696[/ATTACH][/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