Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;dougsmit, post: 2661510, member: 19463&quot;]Back to the original question: I see no reason to use a calipers to measure the thickness of a coin.&nbsp; Relief would be the difference between the deepest and shallowest parts of a die but could not be measured significantly because of uneven striking.&nbsp; We rate &#039;High Relief&#039; as a value judgement just as we do with &#039;Fine Style&#039;.&nbsp; Many coins are thick but have low relief.&nbsp; I&#039;m thinking here especially of jitals and many Indian/Islamic bronzes and billons.&nbsp; Coins can be high relief and thin flan or low relief and thick flan but both measure the same top to bottom.</p><p><br /></p><p>Because of ancient coins rarely being perfectly round, the added accuracy of calipers is offset by the process of deciding which diameter to measure.&nbsp; I own calipers very much like Ken&#039;s but I measure diameter closely enough just laying the coin on a plastic ruler.&nbsp; Even that is not terribly significant since coins made without a collar can vary several millimeters just according to how hard they were hit. </p><p><br /></p><p>For the record, the only reason I see to weight coins past 1/10th gram is to identify the specimen.&nbsp; No ancient minting authority made an effort to match their products to .01g.&nbsp; Most produced a range of weights as long as they got a specified number of coins out of a given weight of metal.&nbsp; Accuracy is wonderful but extra digits are not always significant.[/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