question about 89 p nickel and clad layers in general

So I have this 89 nickel, looks great on back, front is very dark (pics don't do justice, and yes I've ditched tweezers). Just wondering, how do I know if this is PMD? If both sides show similar wear I wouldn't question, but the back is so good. I have a dollar (presidential) also that I wonder about and will post shortly.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Since nickel planchets are solid and have no clad layering, my guess is that it sat obverse down somewhere that would cause that appearance. Likely on the ground or in a mild acid of some sort.

 

Ok, I thought that could be the case, and I've seen plenty of coins that had one side with environmental (PMD), but I swear I read about a 97 nickel clad layer error, or 87, I'll see if I can find. Meantime, I'll post the presidential dollar I have later that is real funky, even the sides look wrong, like convex and black, but that is another story. Thanks much for feedback.

 

While it is possible that you you've encountered something regarding "nickel clad layer errors" I could almost guarantee that it had nothing to do with nickels as much as it had to do with CnClad Layers (copper-nickel) since the common "Nickel Coin" has never been issued nor experimented with as a "clad" coin. They are all solid copper-nickel alloys with more copper than nickel. (75% copper/25% Nickel)

 

Ok, I get it now. Here is the one I was referring to, not a "missing clad layer", struck on wrong stock. 1987-P nickel struck on copper-nickel clad quarter stockThank you folks. http://www.error-ref.com/wrong_stk_correct_comp___87-p_nick_on_clad_qtr_/

 

Interesting, I've never seen a nickel struck on clad stock before!

 

I'd like to see the edge and reverse.

 

Did you look at the link? I hope I didn't mislead. I had been / have been doing mostly nickel searching because it's cheap, and I have good luck. I found this page because I had an 87 (?) that didn't look right, so I researched it, and this was one of the pages I came across. Of course my memory was telling me it was a "missing clad layer" error, but I was using the wrong term, as was pointed out to me. Anyway, yes, very interesting.

 

Click on the link Mickey.