On the scale it sometimes would show as 5.4g. Error-ref.com did not have any pics of a 1946 Henning. Searched all of my Henning date nickels that I've come to possess over the years of acquiring them in change and this is the only one that stood out based on the weight. I did re-calibrate and re-calibrate again, and the scale always showed usually 5.3 and occasionally 5.4g. Is this just a heavy nickel? Pics a little blurry around the edges; I can take clearer pics of those areas if necessary.
Scales which weigh to 2 decimals in grams are more helpful. Those which weigh to only one decimal leave room for inaccuracy because of rounding. Expected weight is 5.000 g +/- 0.194 g This coin may be on a slightly rolled thick planchet. The likelihood is that it is not rolled thick enough to be collectible. Expected thickness is 1.95 mm +/-0.102 mm. If the thickness of the coin exceeds these parameters then it would be considered collectible. I do not see the marker above the Monticello for a Henning. Here is more info: https://www.courierpostonline.com/s...15/04/20/henning-nickel-counterfeit/26070351/
Regarding the dot on the reverse being a marker when the hole in the R is not present, I notice that the 1947 example on error-ref has neither of those. Aside from the weight, are there any visible factors on that error-ref 1947 example which confirm it to be a Henning nickel? And are you aware of any examples of a legit ‘46 Henning that I can compare to? If not, in light of the characteristics of the ‘47 noted above, what would rule my ‘46 out? Thanks for your help!
Like I referenced above, on the error-ref site, they show pics of a 1947 henning and it does not appear to have either the hole in the R or the dot above Monticello. Anyway, I have a 0.1mm accuracy caliper here at my desk and a 2011 nickel in my change. Both the heavy 1946 and a 2011 were showing 1.8mm thickness.
I am not convinced the dot is missing on the 47 in error-ref In either case, it seems the weight of your 46 nickel argues in favor of a Henning, since the thickness appears to be within tolerance.
Perhaps it is there for that ‘47 in the darkened region, but if it is it is not as clear as some other examples. Assuming a 0.01g scale shows something in the 5.3g range like my scale does, what would you suggest as the next step to get better evidence for whether it is a Henning? Thanks!
You could send it for attribution (not grading) for a cost of around $10. Attributors Be sure to contact before sending coins. https://www.fredweinberg.com/?fbclid=IwAR0eZ_L9kEjGKZnwcDxb4pifpEIh0d38Y_JODf9ZFNu--5LXVdX-Trd2Gok http://adventuresincrh.blogspot.com/ http://varietyvista.com/Attribution Services.htm http://doubleddie.com/402401.html https://conecaonline.org/attribution-services/ Mike Diamond, editor of http://www.error-ref.com/
Thanks for the links. Isn’t there some type of metal content scan that can be performed, not that I personally have the means to do do myself. I am not presuming my coin is a likely henning specimen at this point, despite the weight. FWIW, the other nickel for which i measured an equal thickness as my ‘46 weighed in at 5.0g.
You can have an XRF scan done. Some Pawn Shops and Jewelry Stores have XRF scanners. Also, metals testing labs are ubiquitous. Google to find one in your area.
