Smooth edge 1983 Kennedy half

WILLARD, YOUR CAPS LOCK IS ON! PLEASE TURN IT OFF!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I thank everyone for their opinions but please could someone possibly answer my question? Why are weights and dia. unaffected if these are problem coins? I would think there would be some diameter and weight loss due to wear and tare.​

 

Well here's my guess:
The mints have certain tolerances where the coin can be plus or minus the specs.
So maybe yours was one that was overweight but still acceptable.
The wear just brought it down to normal weight.

 

A lot of what appears to be worn smooth is actually hammered smooth by being continuously dropped on it's edge. All of those dings on the face of your coin are from other coins being dropped on them.

 

Are you sure your scale is accurate?

 

Thank you all for your opinions and answers. I am new at collecting etc. You have satisfied my curiosity concerning these two coins. You should not hear from me again except possibly on a new subject.

 

We certainly hope to hear much more from you.
Ask any question you want. There are many here that only want to help.

 

You'd guess that but you'd be wrong given the "+/-" tolerances alloed for these coins.

Grab a stack of them and start comparing coin thickness if you really want a puzzle to ponder.

 

There are coins out there with missing reeding that are errors, so don't give up the hunt. Those coins more than likely won't show all the "rash" on the faces.

 

Hopefully you're referring to "Broadstruck" coins since the reeding is integral to the collar of the minting press.

 

Yes, there also are weakly struck coins that the striking pressure was out of adjustment, that have very weak or faint reeding. Usually the first coins struck with new dies, as the operator is adjusting the machine.

 

If the coins are struck weakly enough that they don't have the reeding they will also be missing the rims and probably some of the obv/rev details as well.