Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;John Burgess, post: 7560941, member: 105098&quot;]look, I know an acid treated coin when I see it and that edge isn&#039;t it. if it was done by someone or the environment, they went way out of their way on it.</p><p>could this have been in the ground at some point though? Yes. but this isn&#039;t what we&#039;d see completely.</p><p><br /></p><p>the pictures leave much to be desired. better pictures of obverse, reverse, and closer pictures of the edge, a couple of them from around the coin edge, looking for tampering. Also check the scale, it needs to do hundreths of a gram or even more exact&nbsp; and be calibrated. if it rounds to 10ths or half grams, who knows what the actual weight is. 2g could be 2.4g or 1.6g or something like that.</p><p><br /></p><p>It could be a split planchet before the strike happened. it could be a quarter struck on dime stock which exists for 1974.</p><p><br /></p><p>Not saying it is, but that edge doesn&#039;t appear to have the eaten out look of a coin that was corroded away, the copper corrodes faster than the nickel.</p><p><br /></p><p>A quarter on a dime metal stock, I&#039;ll save you the math but,</p><p>X = 4.16 grams, the expected weight of a copper-nickel clad dime stock quarter.</p><p><br /></p><p>The weight of the actual coin may deviate up to 0.15 gram from the expected weight. Deviations greater than 0.2 gram in either direction probably mean you’ve got a rolled-thin error or split planchet, instead of a wrong stock error.</p><p><br /></p><p>And the possibility exists, some crafty chemist that really knows his acids shrank down the quarter evenly without eating up the copper core first, I don&#039;t know how someone would achieve it though,&nbsp; but I&#039;m skeptical of that by it&#039;s appearance in these initial photos. It&#039;s the easy answer, but it doesn&#039;t mean it&#039;s the right answer. also seems wrong in that the copper core is a lot of the weight and it&#039;s gone from 5.67g to 2.0g, for a weight this low I&#039;d expect the copper to be completely gone.</p><p><br /></p><p>if it were struck on a cent or a dime planchet, all details couldn&#039;t be present, so this leaves a split planchet before the strike, a seriously rolled thin planchet, or a quarter sized planchet punched out from dime sheet.</p><p><br /></p><p>or someone tampering with a quarter with acids or something else to remove the nickel, but not the copper, possibly getting rid of the copper with a corrosive, then plating it to make it look like the copper is there???</p><p><br /></p><p>Even if it was missing both clad layers it should be around 3.67g.</p><p><br /></p><p>Where&#039;s I&#039;m at with this info presented on this is either a split planchet before the strike and like 70%+ of the planchet is gone like the top part of a hamburger bun,&nbsp; or someone was really tampering with a quarter and went out of their way on it. to add back the copper edge maybe by plating. Even then the reeded edge shouldn&#039;t look like that at all, it should be gone. so they&#039;d need to add that back also.</p><p><br /></p><p>2.0g and the amount of detail on it, it is way too light to be anything else really. And the tampering, while being extreme for someone to have done,&nbsp; is the far more likely conclusion to draw.</p><p>I don&#039;t think this happens by any environmental means.[/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