Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;cladking, post: 1555417, member: 68&quot;]No.&nbsp; I&#039;ve never analyzed it beyond the flame test.&nbsp; But this interior layer sometimes delaminates and it is extremely this and very soft.&nbsp; I believe the only reason the coins don&#039;t show even more damage than they already do is that this layer is so extremely thin that it contains little PVC.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>I don&#039;t know.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>I suspect the soft interior layer was partly to keep the coins from moving around but primarily they were needed to bond the pliofilm but, I just don&#039;t know.&nbsp; Try finding a &#039;68-P cent without spotting.&nbsp; If they weren&#039;t removed and stabilized within the first thirty years they no longer exist.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>The evidence for this is scant.&nbsp; I long suspected that something like this was going on based on the damage and type of damage to the coins.&nbsp; A disproportionate number of the scratches appear to be about the same energy (depth).&nbsp; This suggests they were falling from the same height but there&#039;s no easy explanation for why mint set coins would be subjected to such damage.&nbsp; But the answer seems to appear in the Oct, 2000 Coinage Magazine in the article &quot;The Mint&#039;s Secret Coins&quot; by Kari Stone who quotes a &quot;mint official&quot; that &quot;All uncirculated coins are dipped in an lightly alkaline cleaning solution, then rinsed in water and corn cob dried.&nbsp; This confirms Tom DeLorey&#039;s observations of bags of corn cobs and a cement mixer like contraption.&nbsp; Tom DeLorey may be the only person who&#039;s been given a tour of the some of the mint set equipment.&nbsp; As is the theme of the article, the mint has never been forthcoming or entirely accurate in describing mint set production.&nbsp; Whether this is entirely intentional or not the fact is few people are aware that these are specially made an indistinguishable from regular issues.&nbsp; In virtually every single instance since 1965 the finest coins made have mostly gone into mint sets.&nbsp; These coins have been treated horribly by the hobby and countless millions of them have been cut out of the plastic and spent.&nbsp; Almost no one collects coins dated after 1964 so almost no one has even looked at the coins and the coins in circulation.&nbsp; Of course mint set coins can be pretty bad but finding a Gem in a BU roll can be almost impossible but it&#039;s like shooting fish in a barrel in mint sets.&nbsp; You&#039;ll never have to look at over 400 original mint sets for even the toughest gem and some are so common eight sets is sufficient.&nbsp; In general about two mint sets in three will contain at least one gemmy coin. </p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>It probably doesn&#039;t matter much how a planchet gets polished but this new process seems to impart a deep dark luster.&nbsp; It uses little steel ball bearings to roll over the planchets until they are smooth.&nbsp; There may be other factors at work as well, of course.&nbsp; I&#039;m not aware of any struck coins being &quot;burnished&quot; other than those you mention.&nbsp; The mint does some strange things officially and unofficially.&nbsp; There are coins out there that simply don&#039;t fit the norms.&nbsp; Some of these are nearly &quot;common&quot;.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in