Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="Juan Blanco, post: 1558788, member: 41665"]Coincast-That thread hints at some of the issues I'm looking at - I'll raise a few openly. Different coins wear at slightly different rates - not only for field and depth but perhaps variations in planchet purity. (For example, the 'overweight' character of 1963/4 Roosevelt Dimes.) And then, in different years, certain coins may have circulated more (or less) based on various (possibly unknowable) factors: scarcity of Dimes, fewer transaction with Dimes, etc. All that influences bag-weight, to be sure. I am surprised no one in that thread simplified the 'quantifiable sample' issue, since the buying & selling of $1K face bags is common. For example, in a $1k FB of 90/10 Ag Quarters (4,000)if only SLQs &Washingtons there should be by mintage: 1964D: ~7051964: ~5601963D: ~1351963: ~701962D: ~1251962: ~35....1930: ~51929: ~101927: ~10(and so on) No. Excluding any pitted, clipped, gouged, etc. rejects, there are more than enough coins of the first five dates (above) to establish true tolerance and quintile cohorts by weight. 1:Mint/Uncirculated 2: Very Light Wear (XF-AU grades), 3: Worn("F"), 4: Very Worn("VG" -"G"), 5: Heavily Worn (Junk). Quintiles would conclusively show the strong correlation of weight with wear and not only for heavily worn coins. Loss is loss, wear is wear ... so a typical coin will experience abrasion of use (time it circulates) even if imperceptible to weak eyes. Statistically speaking, many "Uncirculated" were circulated (just 'better preserved' by chance) and - on closer inspection and more rigorous standards, those so-calleds should & will weigh towards the lower end of the First Quintile. They've lost mass in transit. In ~100 or so of the same date/best condition coins, this should become obvious, on the scale. What's more, before a panel of experts the ten or so lowest weight and so-called "Uncircs" would probably also become the most debatable on condition - in other words, not really "Uncirculated". (I wonder "How many fake 1964D's are out there?") As a myriad of bogus eBay sellers demonstrate, "Uncirculated" is often just a make-believe label, the hustler's pecuniary bias. 'Light coins' are worn, to belabor the obvious. And no one should be fleeced by any marketing con: lower grade US 20[SUP]th[/SUP] Ag coins are numismatically poor "investment." Just throw 'em on the scale. Comparing median and average quintile coin-weights for respective years should reveal wear-rates for the Quintiles by Year. Or, the difference between two Years' Median 'Worn' is effectively a 12 Month wear-rate for that mintage. I estimate it's ~ -0.11895% and -0.14539% per year for Washington Quarters, Light to Heavy-Wear: that's the multiplier(s) I'm trying to refine. It may sounds silly per coin, but for a purported "715 ounce bag" that's REALLY only ~665 oz., aggregate loss from annual wear takes an enormous toll. Yet every vendor still claims his is a "715 ounce Face-Bag," hmmm.... Buyer beware. More importantly to my point, coin-wear IS quantifiable, particularly after accurately factoring true tolerance in real samples of the same-same. It just wants for data.[/QUOTE]

Create my FREE Account!

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches