Tarn X Xperiment.

The quarter still appears worse than it did in the 'before' photographs, and the use of chemicals and solvents still tends to make more-visible the problems that a coin has on its surface, not to mention that use of chemicals like these adds new problems to coins such as breaks in the luster, spotting and other issues from improper rinsing, and more.


-thecointrader

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Yep. Why experiment Detecto when 40 years of numismatists have already done so and have a verified product that works? If you wish to experiment, experiment with good dip and learn how to use it properly, how long to dip for, and most important learn when NOT to dip. Those are skills that cannot be bought, but a good dip can without ruining conis with kitchen chemicals.

 

Welll...it was just an experiment. I tried it on some low value silver coins. Wouldn't ever experiment with any of high value.

 

I am just saying sir thousands of people have done the same and learned their lessons. If you wish to experiment on something that could be worthwhile to you in the long run, learning how, when, where, and most important WHY to dip with the correct product could be a valuable skill.

Listen, I know I can get crucified for even saying it, but some coins do benefit from being dipped. Of all of the coins I see, maybe 1% fit in that category, but used properly dipping is actually beneficial to those coins and stops harmful corrosion. Its not for an amatuer to do to a valuable coin, but it can be a good tool in the right hands.

 

Agreed.

http://www.cointalk.com/t205567/

http://www.cointalk.com/t140858/

 

So in other words...the Tarn X didn't restore the luster, it just ate the top layer off...revealing the shiny layer under it? That' explains why the luster didn't have much cart-wheel too it.

That being said, what's a good dip for coins, especially ones with really low silver content.

 

Why can't you just leave them as they are?

 

I do not believe there is any good chemical combination for a dip for any coin except silver coins and it isn't just the % silver, but also the amount or absence of wear, and the amount of tarnish/toning/corrosion present. IMO, a high content silver coin 90%+ in BU condition is about the lower limit to "expect" a high probability of commercial level success if done properly. High AU, 50-50, and below Au, much , much less. With BU coin such as Mexico 72% silver issues, I have about 50-50, AU, much less. With a 50% silver ( forget what it was, foreign commeratives,etc.) I got 0% success, they all looked bad ( melt). Now throw in amount of tarnish/toning/corrosionand the success ratio on all % of silver drops dramatically. That is why most limit dipping to BU, 90% or better, with light to medium toning.

When you get to the lower% silver coins, the other metallic content will not react to the chemicals the same as silver, commonly reacting less and producing microscopic pitting and corresponding loss of lustre.
IMO

Jim

​

 

Never dip a coin unless you know what you're doing is a good axiom . To learn you have to start like the op did , on common noncollector coins . That said you should only use a dip made for coins and a diluted one to start . Also never dip a coin more than a few seconds , 5 at most . If you think it needs another dip then maybe another 3-5 seconds . For those who can't find a coin dip go to Wizards , they have a decent supply of all coin supplies . And definately experiment with pockey change and then common coins of the material of the coins you wish to clean . Also remember dipping is a last resort , morer coins have been ruined by improper cleaning than have been approved , half the battle is knowing which coins will most likely improve and those that wont .

 

OMG!

I saw this on the recent thread list on the right side of the page and had a highly strong feeling this is Detecto's thread.

 

Good call.

 

Doug's whole point is that there is NO luster remaining. The "luster didn't have much of a cartwheel" because there is NO luster at all.

Here is a start: http://www.cointalk.com/t58435/

Look around.. there is a lot of info available online that should be helpful or at least be a start.

 

That quarter didn't have any luster before the Tarn-X, so why would it have any after?

 

I use Tarn-X on silver coins frequently with very good results. I dip the coins, mostly Morgan Silver dollars, for several minutes, then rinse in water. I dry them each with a soft cloth and afterwards use silver cream to gently apply a light coat which I then wipe gently leaving a mint luster. the so-called "collectors", the know-it-alls will say never clean silver coins in this manner. I have several hundreds of these Morgan silver dollars and they sell better than the non-cleaned coins. proves the 'collectors' are not only wrong but also dumb.

 

Ah, yes... the old "if you don't agree with me you're dumb" angle. It's a fantastic and wise approach, really, but I can't help but to wonder why, instead of bumping an over four year old thread to essentially label the majority of this board as idiots, you didn't simply post photos of your work. Would this not be more helpful to the "dumb collectors" here than taking shots at them or presenting yourself, without proof, as being more educated/enlightened? You made the claim, so now it's on you to "prove" how wonderful your "method" supposedly is.

I will eagerly await the opportunity to see your detailed photos, both before and after, please.

 

Rook needs a lesson in manners.

 

Tell us Tom Treadwell, what's your eBay i.d.?

 

Nice introduction. Now go elsewhere, we don't need or want your kind here.

 

The "dumb" collectors are the people who don't buy your ruined junk coins...is that how I'm ready this right. It's people like you who rip off unsuspecting new collectors and drive them away from this hobby.