Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Interesting piece of embedded metal

Expand Messages
  • Mike Diamond
    I m eager to see what kind of error this is. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&Item=110023878515 It could be struck-in or rolled-in. My gut tells
    Message 1 of 18 , Aug 27, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      I'm eager to see what kind of error this is.

      http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&Item=110023878515

      It could be struck-in or rolled-in. My gut tells me it's rolled-in,
      but my instincts have been wrong before. I do believe it's genuine, as
      I can just make out the characteristic fissure that should surround
      both kinds of errors. I hope it's rolled-in as these are much tougher
      to find. The only rolled-in errors I have at present are bits of
      black, sinuous wire rolled into clad quarters. Rolled-in errors are
      much tougher to diagnose in solid-alloy coins, since there is no outer
      clad layer or plating to split and spread apart during rolling.

      Whichever kind of error it is, I seem to have gotten a bargain.
    • Rob Risi
      TO ME IT APPEARS TO BE A LAMINATION STRIP??? JUST MY OPINION.......$52 SURE SEEMS A BIT HIGH...... KEEP US POSTED MIKE. ROB Mike Diamond wrote:
      Message 2 of 18 , Aug 27, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        TO ME IT APPEARS TO BE A LAMINATION STRIP???
        JUST MY OPINION.......$52 SURE SEEMS A BIT HIGH......
        KEEP US POSTED MIKE.
        ROB

        Mike Diamond <mdia1@...> wrote:
        I'm eager to see what kind of error this is.

        http://cgi.ebay. com/ws/eBayISAPI .dll?ViewItem& Item=11002387851 5

        It could be struck-in or rolled-in. My gut tells me it's rolled-in,
        but my instincts have been wrong before. I do believe it's genuine, as
        I can just make out the characteristic fissure that should surround
        both kinds of errors. I hope it's rolled-in as these are much tougher
        to find. The only rolled-in errors I have at present are bits of
        black, sinuous wire rolled into clad quarters. Rolled-in errors are
        much tougher to diagnose in solid-alloy coins, since there is no outer
        clad layer or plating to split and spread apart during rolling.

        Whichever kind of error it is, I seem to have gotten a bargain.



        Do you Yahoo!?
        Get on board. You're invited to try the new Yahoo! Mail.

      • Mike Diamond
        A lamination error will not show a color difference from the surrounding metal. While improper alloy mix errors are often associated with laminations, the
        Message 3 of 18 , Aug 27, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          A lamination error will not show a color difference from the
          surrounding metal. While improper alloy mix errors are often
          associated with laminations, the color differences are subtle --
          e.g., light brown vs. dark brown. It's hard to conceive of an
          improper alloy mix leaving a strip of unadulterated zinc or tin
          floating on the surface. Also, such a strip would not probably not
          show a distinct fissure around the margin.

          Still, I won't close the door on alternative explanations.

          I have noticed that prices for embedded debris seem to be dropping on
          eBay (if not elsewhere). The last rolled-in wire I picked up for
          less than $70. My last struck-in staple (on a buffalo nickel, no
          less), I picked up for $60. And now this. It's a category I like,
          so I'm not complaining.

          --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, Rob Risi
          <rjrisi@...> wrote:
          >
          > TO ME IT APPEARS TO BE A LAMINATION STRIP???
          > JUST MY OPINION.......$52 SURE SEEMS A BIT HIGH......
          > KEEP US POSTED MIKE.
          > ROB
          >
          > Mike Diamond <mdia1@...> wrote:
          > I'm eager to see what kind of error this is.
          >
          > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&Item=110023878515
          >
          > It could be struck-in or rolled-in. My gut tells me it's rolled-in,
          > but my instincts have been wrong before. I do believe it's genuine,
          as
          > I can just make out the characteristic fissure that should surround
          > both kinds of errors. I hope it's rolled-in as these are much
          tougher
          > to find. The only rolled-in errors I have at present are bits of
          > black, sinuous wire rolled into clad quarters. Rolled-in errors are
          > much tougher to diagnose in solid-alloy coins, since there is no
          outer
          > clad layer or plating to split and spread apart during rolling.
          >
          > Whichever kind of error it is, I seem to have gotten a bargain.
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > ---------------------------------
          > Do you Yahoo!?
          > Get on board. You're invited to try the new Yahoo! Mail.
          >
        • Mike Diamond
          Here s another scenario. It could be a flake of nickel that landed in the molten cent mixture and was poured into it. Since the melting point of nickel (2647
          Message 4 of 18 , Aug 27, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Here's another scenario. It could be a flake of nickel that landed
            in the molten cent mixture and was poured into it. Since the melting
            point of nickel (2647 degrees Fahrenheit) is a lot higher than copper
            (1981 degrees), zinc (747 degrees), and tin (449 degrees), it's
            possible for a stray bit of nickel to survive intact in the molten
            cent alloy. So this could be a poured-in error, as opposed to struck-
            in, or rolled-in.

            If it's pure nickel it will be attracted to a magnet. If it's copper
            nickel, however, then it stick to a magnet.

            It's fun to ponder all these possibilities.

            --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
            <mdia1@...> wrote:
            >
            > A lamination error will not show a color difference from the
            > surrounding metal. While improper alloy mix errors are often
            > associated with laminations, the color differences are subtle --
            > e.g., light brown vs. dark brown. It's hard to conceive of an
            > improper alloy mix leaving a strip of unadulterated zinc or tin
            > floating on the surface. Also, such a strip would not probably not
            > show a distinct fissure around the margin.
            >
            > Still, I won't close the door on alternative explanations.
            >
            > I have noticed that prices for embedded debris seem to be dropping
            on
            > eBay (if not elsewhere). The last rolled-in wire I picked up for
            > less than $70. My last struck-in staple (on a buffalo nickel, no
            > less), I picked up for $60. And now this. It's a category I like,
            > so I'm not complaining.
          • Rich Schemmer
            $52. High? I think it s increditably cheap... Mostly its SILVER imbedded in the Wheat Cennt. I ve seen these offerd for Hundreds of dollars.. Great snipe
            Message 5 of 18 , Aug 27, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              $52. High? I think it's increditably cheap... Mostly its SILVER
              imbedded in the Wheat Cennt. I 've seen these offerd for Hundreds of
              dollars.. Great snipe Mike
              --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, Rob Risi
              <rjrisi@...> wrote:
              >
              > TO ME IT APPEARS TO BE A LAMINATION STRIP???
              > JUST MY OPINION.......$52 SURE SEEMS A BIT HIGH......
              > KEEP US POSTED MIKE.
              > ROB
              >
              > Mike Diamond <mdia1@...> wrote:
              > I'm eager to see what kind of error this is.
              >
              > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&Item=110023878515
              >
              > It could be struck-in or rolled-in. My gut tells me it's rolled-in,
              > but my instincts have been wrong before. I do believe it's genuine,
              as
              > I can just make out the characteristic fissure that should surround
              > both kinds of errors. I hope it's rolled-in as these are much
              tougher
              > to find. The only rolled-in errors I have at present are bits of
              > black, sinuous wire rolled into clad quarters. Rolled-in errors are
              > much tougher to diagnose in solid-alloy coins, since there is no
              outer
              > clad layer or plating to split and spread apart during rolling.
              >
              > Whichever kind of error it is, I seem to have gotten a bargain.
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > ---------------------------------
              > Do you Yahoo!?
              > Get on board. You're invited to try the new Yahoo! Mail.
              >
            • Mike Diamond
              Chris Pilliod analyzed some of these struck-in white metal pieces in a past issue of Errorscope and I seem to recall that he did find that they were silver.
              Message 6 of 18 , Aug 27, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Chris Pilliod analyzed some of these struck-in white metal pieces in
                a past issue of Errorscope and I seem to recall that he did find that
                they were silver. However, it was a small sample, so I can't
                extrapolate and conclude that most are silver. Copper-nickel is an
                obvious alternative candidate.

                Without an SEM/X-ray analysis, I don't know how you'd establish the
                composition of any individual metal inclusion. Naturally, I'll stick
                a magnet on the thing to eliminate steel or pure elemental nickel.

                --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Rich Schemmer"
                <RichErrors@...> wrote:
                >
                > $52. High? I think it's increditably cheap... Mostly its SILVER
                > imbedded in the Wheat Cennt. I 've seen these offerd for Hundreds
                of
                > dollars.. Great snipe Mike
                > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, Rob Risi
                > <rjrisi@> wrote:
                > >
                > > TO ME IT APPEARS TO BE A LAMINATION STRIP???
                > > JUST MY OPINION.......$52 SURE SEEMS A BIT HIGH......
                > > KEEP US POSTED MIKE.
                > > ROB
              • Rob Risi
                OK I TAKE THAT BACK...$52 IS NOT HIGH NOW THAT I KNOW THE ERROR...IF ITS INDEED A STRIP OF SILVER, ITS A STEAL MIKE....CONGRATS ROB Rich Schemmer
                Message 7 of 18 , Aug 28, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  OK I TAKE THAT BACK...$52 IS NOT HIGH NOW THAT I KNOW THE ERROR...IF ITS INDEED A STRIP OF SILVER, ITS A STEAL MIKE....CONGRATS
                  ROB

                  Rich Schemmer <RichErrors@...> wrote:
                  $52. High? I think it's increditably cheap... Mostly its SILVER
                  imbedded in the Wheat Cennt. I 've seen these offerd for Hundreds of
                  dollars.. Great snipe Mike
                  --- In errorcoininformatio nexchange@ yahoogroups. com, Rob Risi
                  <rjrisi@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > TO ME IT APPEARS TO BE A LAMINATION STRIP???
                  > JUST MY OPINION..... ..$52 SURE SEEMS A BIT HIGH......
                  > KEEP US POSTED MIKE.
                  > ROB
                  >
                  > Mike Diamond <mdia1@...> wrote:
                  > I'm eager to see what kind of error this is.
                  >
                  > http://cgi.ebay. com/ws/eBayISAPI .dll?ViewItem& Item=11002387851 5
                  >
                  > It could be struck-in or rolled-in. My gut tells me it's rolled-in,
                  > but my instincts have been wrong before. I do believe it's genuine,
                  as
                  > I can just make out the characteristic fissure that should surround
                  > both kinds of errors. I hope it's rolled-in as these are much
                  tougher
                  > to find. The only rolled-in errors I have at present are bits of
                  > black, sinuous wire rolled into clad quarters. Rolled-in errors are
                  > much tougher to diagnose in solid-alloy coins, since there is no
                  outer
                  > clad layer or plating to split and spread apart during rolling.
                  >
                  > Whichever kind of error it is, I seem to have gotten a bargain.
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > ------------ --------- --------- ---
                  > Do you Yahoo!?
                  > Get on board. You're invited to try the new Yahoo! Mail.
                  >



                  All-new Yahoo! Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster.

                • Mike Diamond
                  Up close, this error is even more interesting than I thought. Puzzling, too. It s definitely not struck-in. It also does not appear to have been rolled-in, at
                  Message 8 of 18 , Aug 30, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Up close, this error is even more interesting than I thought.
                    Puzzling, too.

                    It's definitely not struck-in. It also does not appear to have been
                    rolled-in, at least during the later stages of the rolling process.

                    The piece of white metal seems to be an intrinsic part of the coin.
                    It actually dives into the copper at its pointy end and re-emerges on
                    the rim. The copper border around it has the ragged appearance of a
                    lamination error and, in fact, other parts of the coin show signs of
                    cracking. There actually isn't much of a fissure around the white
                    metal fragment, which indicates it was there from a very early
                    stage. The white metal fragment is oriented along the "grain" of the
                    coin.

                    I believe that this may be a piece of zinc, tin, or copper-nickel
                    that ended up in the ingot as it was cooling. It doesn't look like
                    silver -- too dull and gray. It's not attracted to a magnet, so it's
                    not steel or elemental nickel. Since copper-nickel has a higher
                    melting point than zinc, tin, or copper, this may be its identity.

                    The piece of white metal is exposed on the edge at its wide end.

                    I would have to classify it as a very unusual "improper alloy mix"
                    or "foreign metal inclusion". It's more of a "poured-in" error (like
                    a slag inclusion), than anything else.

                    I can add yet another category to master error list!

                    --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
                    <mdia1@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Here's another scenario. It could be a flake of nickel that landed
                    > in the molten cent mixture and was poured into it. Since the
                    melting
                    > point of nickel (2647 degrees Fahrenheit) is a lot higher than
                    copper
                    > (1981 degrees), zinc (747 degrees), and tin (449 degrees), it's
                    > possible for a stray bit of nickel to survive intact in the molten
                    > cent alloy. So this could be a poured-in error, as opposed to
                    struck-
                    > in, or rolled-in.
                    >
                    > If it's pure nickel it will be attracted to a magnet. If it's
                    copper
                    > nickel, however, then it stick to a magnet.
                    >
                    > It's fun to ponder all these possibilities.
                    >
                    > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
                    > <mdia1@> wrote:
                    > >
                    > > A lamination error will not show a color difference from the
                    > > surrounding metal. While improper alloy mix errors are often
                    > > associated with laminations, the color differences are subtle --
                    > > e.g., light brown vs. dark brown. It's hard to conceive of an
                    > > improper alloy mix leaving a strip of unadulterated zinc or tin
                    > > floating on the surface. Also, such a strip would not probably
                    not
                    > > show a distinct fissure around the margin.
                    > >
                    > > Still, I won't close the door on alternative explanations.
                    > >
                    > > I have noticed that prices for embedded debris seem to be
                    dropping
                    > on
                    > > eBay (if not elsewhere). The last rolled-in wire I picked up for
                    > > less than $70. My last struck-in staple (on a buffalo nickel, no
                    > > less), I picked up for $60. And now this. It's a category I
                    like,
                    > > so I'm not complaining.
                    >
                  • Mike Diamond
                    After further thought, perhaps this strip of gray metal is simply a droplet of pure tin or zinc -- originally molten -- that failed to mix with the surrounding
                    Message 9 of 18 , Aug 30, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      After further thought, perhaps this strip of gray metal is simply a
                      droplet of pure tin or zinc -- originally molten -- that failed to
                      mix with the surrounding copper and solidified into a solid band. I
                      am ignorant of the dynamics of how molten metal solidifies, so this
                      is just a guess. Perhaps its final shape is determined by the lining
                      up of surrounding crystallites. I do know that in conventional
                      improper alloy mix errors you don't get swirls like milk in coffee.
                      You end up with rather straight bands.

                      --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
                      <mdia1@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > Up close, this error is even more interesting than I thought.
                      > Puzzling, too.
                      >
                      > It's definitely not struck-in. It also does not appear to have
                      been
                      > rolled-in, at least during the later stages of the rolling process.
                      >
                      > The piece of white metal seems to be an intrinsic part of the
                      coin.
                      > It actually dives into the copper at its pointy end and re-emerges
                      on
                      > the rim. The copper border around it has the ragged appearance of
                      a
                      > lamination error and, in fact, other parts of the coin show signs
                      of
                      > cracking. There actually isn't much of a fissure around the white
                      > metal fragment, which indicates it was there from a very early
                      > stage. The white metal fragment is oriented along the "grain" of
                      the
                      > coin.
                      >
                      > I believe that this may be a piece of zinc, tin, or copper-nickel
                      > that ended up in the ingot as it was cooling. It doesn't look like
                      > silver -- too dull and gray. It's not attracted to a magnet, so
                      it's
                      > not steel or elemental nickel. Since copper-nickel has a higher
                      > melting point than zinc, tin, or copper, this may be its identity.
                      >
                      > The piece of white metal is exposed on the edge at its wide end.
                      >
                      > I would have to classify it as a very unusual "improper alloy mix"
                      > or "foreign metal inclusion". It's more of a "poured-in" error
                      (like
                      > a slag inclusion), than anything else.
                      >
                      > I can add yet another category to the master error list!
                      >
                      > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
                      > <mdia1@> wrote:
                      > >
                      > > Here's another scenario. It could be a flake of nickel that
                      landed
                      > > in the molten cent mixture and was poured into it. Since the
                      > melting
                      > > point of nickel (2647 degrees Fahrenheit) is a lot higher than
                      > copper
                      > > (1981 degrees), zinc (747 degrees), and tin (449 degrees), it's
                      > > possible for a stray bit of nickel to survive intact in the
                      molten
                      > > cent alloy. So this could be a poured-in error, as opposed to
                      > struck-
                      > > in, or rolled-in.
                      > >
                      > > If it's pure nickel it will be attracted to a magnet. If it's
                      > copper
                      > > nickel, however, then it stick to a magnet.
                      > >
                      > > It's fun to ponder all these possibilities.
                    • Mike Diamond
                      Of the two (tin and zinc), I see tin as much more likely. If it was zinc it would have oxidized a long time ago to a darker matte gray. Instead, this strip is
                      Message 10 of 18 , Aug 30, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Of the two (tin and zinc), I see tin as much more likely. If it was
                        zinc it would have oxidized a long time ago to a darker matte gray.
                        Instead, this strip is smooth and shows some luster.

                        The more I study it, the more I lean to an extreme case of improper
                        alloy mix. But I can't know for sure without a chemical analysis.

                        --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
                        <mdia1@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > After further thought, perhaps this strip of gray metal is simply a
                        > droplet of pure tin or zinc -- originally molten -- that failed to
                        > mix with the surrounding copper and solidified into a solid band.
                        I
                        > am ignorant of the dynamics of how molten metal solidifies, so this
                        > is just a guess. Perhaps its final shape is determined by the
                        lining
                        > up of surrounding crystallites. I do know that in conventional
                        > improper alloy mix errors you don't get swirls like milk in
                        coffee. You likewise don't get circles and ovals of lighter-colored
                        metal. You end up with rather straight bands.
                      • Mike Diamond
                        I m curious, have any of you encountered a copper-alloy cent with a strip of white metal embedded in the surface which was intrinsic to the planchet? On page
                        Message 11 of 18 , Aug 31, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          I'm curious, have any of you encountered a copper-alloy cent with a
                          strip of white metal embedded in the surface which was intrinsic to
                          the planchet?

                          On page 246 of the 5th edition of Minting Varieties and Errors, Alan
                          Herbert presents a picture of a 1944-D cent with a number of white
                          metal inclusions. Some of the pieces are elongated while others are
                          subcircular. A group of three inclusions line up pretty nicely,
                          although I don't know if the transect parallels the grain of the
                          coin. While Herbert says the inclusions look like aluminum, I see no
                          reason to believe him. It's possible it belongs in the same category
                          as my recently purchased 1948 cent.

                          --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
                          <mdia1@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Of the two (tin and zinc), I see tin as much more likely. If it
                          was
                          > zinc it would have oxidized a long time ago to a darker matte
                          gray.
                          > Instead, this strip is smooth and shows some luster.
                          >
                          > The more I study it, the more I lean to an extreme case of improper
                          > alloy mix. But I can't know for sure without a chemical analysis.
                        • Al C.
                          Never own one, but I have seen a few (maybe 5) with smaller strips than yours Mike. ... __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired
                          Message 12 of 18 , Aug 31, 2006
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Never own one, but I have seen a few (maybe 5) with
                            smaller strips than yours Mike.



                            --- Mike Diamond <mdia1@...> wrote:

                            > I'm curious, have any of you encountered a
                            > copper-alloy cent with a
                            > strip of white metal embedded in the surface which
                            > was intrinsic to
                            > the planchet?
                            >
                            > On page 246 of the 5th edition of Minting Varieties
                            > and Errors, Alan
                            > Herbert presents a picture of a 1944-D cent with a
                            > number of white
                            > metal inclusions. Some of the pieces are elongated
                            > while others are
                            > subcircular. A group of three inclusions line up
                            > pretty nicely,
                            > although I don't know if the transect parallels the
                            > grain of the
                            > coin. While Herbert says the inclusions look like
                            > aluminum, I see no
                            > reason to believe him. It's possible it belongs in
                            > the same category
                            > as my recently purchased 1948 cent.
                            >
                            > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com,
                            > "Mike Diamond"
                            > <mdia1@...> wrote:
                            > >
                            > > Of the two (tin and zinc), I see tin as much more
                            > likely. If it
                            > was
                            > > zinc it would have oxidized a long time ago to a
                            > darker matte
                            > gray.
                            > > Instead, this strip is smooth and shows some
                            > luster.
                            > >
                            > > The more I study it, the more I lean to an extreme
                            > case of improper
                            > > alloy mix. But I can't know for sure without a
                            > chemical analysis.
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >


                            __________________________________________________
                            Do You Yahoo!?
                            Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
                            http://mail.yahoo.com
                          • Mike Diamond
                            Thanks, Al. I figured there had to be other examples out there.
                            Message 13 of 18 , Aug 31, 2006
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Thanks, Al. I figured there had to be other examples out there.

                              --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Al C."
                              <bull102797@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > Never own one, but I have seen a few (maybe 5) with
                              > smaller strips than yours Mike.
                              >
                              >
                              > --- Mike Diamond <mdia1@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > > I'm curious, have any of you encountered a
                              > > copper-alloy cent with a
                              > > strip of white metal embedded in the surface which
                              > > was intrinsic to
                              > > the planchet?
                              > >
                              > > On page 246 of the 5th edition of Minting Varieties
                              > > and Errors, Alan
                              > > Herbert presents a picture of a 1944-D cent with a
                              > > number of white
                              > > metal inclusions. Some of the pieces are elongated
                              > > while others are
                              > > subcircular. A group of three inclusions line up
                              > > pretty nicely,
                              > > although I don't know if the transect parallels the
                              > > grain of the
                              > > coin. While Herbert says the inclusions look like
                              > > aluminum, I see no
                              > > reason to believe him. It's possible it belongs in
                              > > the same category
                              > > as my recently purchased 1948 cent.
                            • Rich Schemmer
                              This link to one I have on a 1911-D in MS 64 Price reflects the Rarity of the Date & the Very high Grade http://tinyurl.com/qxwmb Thanx Rich Schemmer Rich
                              Message 14 of 18 , Sep 1, 2006
                              • 0 Attachment
                                This link to one I have on a 1911-D in MS 64
                                Price reflects the Rarity of the Date & the Very high Grade

                                http://tinyurl.com/qxwmb

                                Thanx
                                Rich Schemmer
                                Rich Schemmer Error Coins
                                http://WWW.RichErrors.com/store.php
                                --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
                                <mdia1@...> wrote:
                                >
                                > I'm curious, have any of you encountered a copper-alloy cent with a
                                > strip of white metal embedded in the surface which was intrinsic to
                                > the planchet?
                                >
                                > On page 246 of the 5th edition of Minting Varieties and Errors,
                                Alan
                                > Herbert presents a picture of a 1944-D cent with a number of white
                                > metal inclusions. Some of the pieces are elongated while others
                                are
                                > subcircular. A group of three inclusions line up pretty nicely,
                                > although I don't know if the transect parallels the grain of the
                                > coin. While Herbert says the inclusions look like aluminum, I see
                                no
                                > reason to believe him. It's possible it belongs in the same
                                category
                                > as my recently purchased 1948 cent.
                                >
                                > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
                                > <mdia1@> wrote:
                                > >
                                > > Of the two (tin and zinc), I see tin as much more likely. If it
                                > was
                                > > zinc it would have oxidized a long time ago to a darker matte
                                > gray.
                                > > Instead, this strip is smooth and shows some luster.
                                > >
                                > > The more I study it, the more I lean to an extreme case of
                                improper
                                > > alloy mix. But I can't know for sure without a chemical analysis.
                                >
                              • mrlindy2000
                                I hadn t noticed that one on your site Rich. Its a pretty coin and from the first year the Denver Mint made cents. 11D is a tough year for any errors on cents.
                                Message 15 of 18 , Sep 1, 2006
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  I hadn't noticed that one on your site Rich. Its a pretty coin and
                                  from the first year the Denver Mint made cents. 11D is a tough year
                                  for any errors on cents.

                                  Lindy

                                  --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Rich Schemmer"
                                  <RichErrors@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > This link to one I have on a 1911-D in MS 64
                                  > Price reflects the Rarity of the Date & the Very high Grade
                                  >
                                  > http://tinyurl.com/qxwmb
                                  >
                                  > Thanx
                                  > Rich Schemmer
                                  > Rich Schemmer Error Coins
                                  > http://WWW.RichErrors.com/store.php
                                  > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike
                                  Diamond"
                                  > <mdia1@> wrote:
                                  > >
                                  > > I'm curious, have any of you encountered a copper-alloy cent
                                  with a
                                  > > strip of white metal embedded in the surface which was intrinsic
                                  to
                                  > > the planchet?
                                  > >
                                  > > On page 246 of the 5th edition of Minting Varieties and Errors,
                                  > Alan
                                  > > Herbert presents a picture of a 1944-D cent with a number of
                                  white
                                  > > metal inclusions. Some of the pieces are elongated while others
                                  > are
                                  > > subcircular. A group of three inclusions line up pretty nicely,
                                  > > although I don't know if the transect parallels the grain of the
                                  > > coin. While Herbert says the inclusions look like aluminum, I
                                  see
                                  > no
                                  > > reason to believe him. It's possible it belongs in the same
                                  > category
                                  > > as my recently purchased 1948 cent.
                                  > >
                                  > > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike
                                  Diamond"
                                  > > <mdia1@> wrote:
                                  > > >
                                  > > > Of the two (tin and zinc), I see tin as much more likely. If
                                  it
                                  > > was
                                  > > > zinc it would have oxidized a long time ago to a darker matte
                                  > > gray.
                                  > > > Instead, this strip is smooth and shows some luster.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > The more I study it, the more I lean to an extreme case of
                                  > improper
                                  > > > alloy mix. But I can't know for sure without a chemical
                                  analysis.
                                  > >
                                  >
                                • Mike Diamond
                                  It looks just like my error, Rich. Thanks. Of course if it IS just like my error, then it s not struck-in but is, instead, an intrinsic part of the planchet.
                                  Message 16 of 18 , Sep 1, 2006
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    It looks just like my error, Rich. Thanks.

                                    Of course if it IS just like my error, then it's not struck-in but is,
                                    instead, an intrinsic part of the planchet. As to its claimed
                                    composition as silver, this would be nothing more than a guess unless a
                                    chemical analysis was performed.

                                    --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Rich Schemmer"
                                    <RichErrors@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > This link to one I have on a 1911-D in MS 64
                                    > Price reflects the Rarity of the Date & the Very high Grade
                                    >
                                    > http://tinyurl.com/qxwmb
                                    >
                                    > Thanx
                                    > Rich Schemmer
                                  • copstaffer
                                    Mike - In the Default Album I posted two pics of another similar looking cent...dramatic like yours, but distinct in it s appearance. This one is certified by
                                    Message 17 of 18 , Sep 1, 2006
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Mike - In the Default Album I posted two pics of another similar looking cent...dramatic
                                      like yours, but distinct in it's appearance. This one is certified by NGC as "Silver in
                                      Planchet on Obverse." In this case, it appears the foreign metal is indeed an intrisic part of
                                      the planchet. The "silver" is dispersed much differently than in yours and Rich's
                                      coins...instead of looking like a strip of metal, it looks almost like it was "mixed" in before
                                      the blank was even punched.

                                      What do you think?

                                      Thad


                                      --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond" <mdia1@...>
                                      wrote:
                                      >
                                      > It looks just like my error, Rich. Thanks.
                                      >
                                      > Of course if it IS just like my error, then it's not struck-in but is,
                                      > instead, an intrinsic part of the planchet. As to its claimed
                                      > composition as silver, this would be nothing more than a guess unless a
                                      > chemical analysis was performed.
                                      >
                                      > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Rich Schemmer"
                                      > <RichErrors@> wrote:
                                      > >
                                      > > This link to one I have on a 1911-D in MS 64
                                      > > Price reflects the Rarity of the Date & the Very high Grade
                                      > >
                                      > > http://tinyurl.com/qxwmb
                                      > >
                                      > > Thanx
                                      > > Rich Schemmer
                                      >
                                    • Mike Diamond
                                      The diffuse character of the silver makes it likely that it is indeed an intrinsic part of the planchet, rather than a rolled-in or struck-in error. Judging
                                      Message 18 of 18 , Sep 1, 2006
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        The diffuse character of the "silver" makes it likely that it is
                                        indeed an intrinsic part of the planchet, rather than a rolled-in or
                                        struck-in error. Judging from the light/dark boundary in the copper
                                        area below, it would seem that the coin is also afflicted with a
                                        conventional improper alloy mix error.

                                        These view of mine are tentative pending an up-close examination. If
                                        you'd like, I'd be happy to inspect it for you.

                                        Mike

                                        --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, copstaffer
                                        <no_reply@...> wrote:
                                        >
                                        > Mike - In the Default Album I posted two pics of another similar
                                        looking cent...dramatic
                                        > like yours, but distinct in it's appearance. This one is certified
                                        by NGC as "Silver in
                                        > Planchet on Obverse." In this case, it appears the foreign metal
                                        is indeed an intrisic part of
                                        > the planchet. The "silver" is dispersed much differently than in
                                        yours and Rich's
                                        > coins...instead of looking like a strip of metal, it looks almost
                                        like it was "mixed" in before
                                        > the blank was even punched.
                                        >
                                        > What do you think?
                                        >
                                        > Thad
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
                                        <mdia1@>
                                        > wrote:
                                        > >
                                        > > It looks just like my error, Rich. Thanks.
                                        > >
                                        > > Of course if it IS just like my error, then it's not struck-in
                                        but is,
                                        > > instead, an intrinsic part of the planchet. As to its claimed
                                        > > composition as silver, this would be nothing more than a guess
                                        unless a
                                        > > chemical analysis was performed.
                                        > >
                                        > > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Rich
                                        Schemmer"
                                        > > <RichErrors@> wrote:
                                        > > >
                                        > > > This link to one I have on a 1911-D in MS 64
                                        > > > Price reflects the Rarity of the Date & the Very high Grade
                                        > > >
                                        > > > http://tinyurl.com/qxwmb
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Thanx
                                        > > > Rich Schemmer
                                        > >
                                        >
                                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.