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

PCGS labels for wrong stock coins

Expand Messages
  • Travis Bolton
    I just got Len s/Jim s auction 17 list. Before a large listing of wrong stock thickness errors there is a brief paragraph saying that PCGS is still in the
    Message 1 of 11 , Nov 4, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      I just got Len's/Jim's auction 17 list. Before a large listing of
      wrong stock thickness errors there is a brief paragraph saying that
      PCGS is "still in the midst of deciding how to label wrong stock
      coins". I was wondering if anyone (Fred) might know more about this.
      Are the old descriptions being considered for a change so these coins
      cannot be confused with strikes on the wrong planchet?
      ---Travis
    • Error Coins
      Thanks for bring that to our attention, Travis. Unfortunately, it s not on the web site yet. I keep trying to complete my simplistic set, but can t seem to
      Message 2 of 11 , Nov 4, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Thanks for bring that to our attention, Travis. Unfortunately, it's not on the web site yet.  I keep trying to complete my simplistic set, but can't seem to find a clad 50 cent on quarter stock at a decent price (and from the looks of one closing on eBay today, I may never!)
         
        I think these are seriously underappreciated, probably because they are rather vanilla in appearance. It seems those on thicker stock are especially difficult to locate.
         
        I'm curious about the PCGS statement, as well. I thought "Wrong Stock" was an accepted term of art.
         
        Later......
         


        From: errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com [mailto:errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Travis Bolton
        Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 2:08 PM
        To: errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [Error Coin Information Exchange] PCGS labels for wrong stock coins

        I just got Len's/Jim's auction 17 list. Before a large listing of
        wrong stock thickness errors there is a brief paragraph saying that
        PCGS is "still in the midst of deciding how to label wrong stock
        coins". I was wondering if anyone (Fred) might know more about this.
        Are the old descriptions being considered for a change so these coins
        cannot be confused with strikes on the wrong planchet?
        ---Travis

      • Rich Schemmer
        Actually, without the exact weights and with many of the past wrong stock weight scales having been wrong. The correct term would be thick or thin planche,
        Message 3 of 11 , Nov 4, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Actually, without the exact weights and with many of the past wrong
          stock weight scales having been wrong. The correct term would be
          thick or thin planche, unless otherwised proved

          Thanx
          Rich Schemmer
          Rich Schemmer Error Coins
          http://WWW.RichErrors.com/store.php
          --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Error Coins"
          <errorcoins@...> wrote:
          >
          > Thanks for bring that to our attention, Travis. Unfortunately, it's
          not on the
          > web site yet. I keep trying to complete my simplistic set, but
          can't seem to
          > find a clad 50 cent on quarter stock at a decent price (and from
          the looks of
          > one closing on eBay today, I may never!)
          >
          > I think these are seriously underappreciated, probably because they
          are rather
          > vanilla in appearance. It seems those on thicker stock are
          especially difficult
          > to locate.
          >
          > I'm curious about the PCGS statement, as well. I thought "Wrong
          Stock" was an
          > accepted term of art.
          >
          > Later......
          > Steve
          >
          > Error Type Collection:
          > http://www.five0central.com/ErrorCollection/Five0ErrorTypeSet.htm
          >
          >
          >
          > _____
          >
          > From: errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com
          > [mailto:errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
          Travis
          > Bolton
          > Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 2:08 PM
          > To: errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com
          > Subject: [Error Coin Information Exchange] PCGS labels for wrong
          stock coins
          >
          >
          >
          > I just got Len's/Jim's auction 17 list. Before a large listing of
          > wrong stock thickness errors there is a brief paragraph saying that
          > PCGS is "still in the midst of deciding how to label wrong stock
          > coins". I was wondering if anyone (Fred) might know more about this.
          > Are the old descriptions being considered for a change so these
          coins
          > cannot be confused with strikes on the wrong planchet?
          > ---Travis
          >
        • Mike Diamond
          Using simple algebra and elementary geometry, one can calculate the expected weight for any wrong stock error. For example, this 1967 half dollar (which Steve
          Message 4 of 11 , Nov 4, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Using simple algebra and elementary geometry, one can calculate the
            expected weight for any wrong stock error.

            For example, this 1967 half dollar (which Steve obliquely referred
            to) is much too light for Cu-Ni clad quarter stock, or 40% silver
            half dollar stock rolled to quarter thickness. It is also too heavy
            for Cu-Ni clad dime stock or 40% silver half dollar stock rolled to
            dime thickness.

            http://tiny.bz/013g/

            I'll be back with the expected weights. I don't entirely trust the
            published tables, either.


            --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Rich Schemmer"
            <RichErrors@...> wrote:
            >
            > Actually, without the exact weights and with many of the past wrong
            > stock weight scales having been wrong. The correct term would be
            > thick or thin planche, unless otherwised proved
            >
            > Thanx
            > Rich Schemmer
            > Rich Schemmer Error Coins
            > http://WWW.RichErrors.com/store.php
            > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Error Coins"
            > <errorcoins@> wrote:
            > >
            > > Thanks for bring that to our attention, Travis. Unfortunately,
            it's
            > not on the
            > > web site yet. I keep trying to complete my simplistic set, but
            > can't seem to
            > > find a clad 50 cent on quarter stock at a decent price (and from
            > the looks of
            > > one closing on eBay today, I may never!)
            > >
            > > I think these are seriously underappreciated, probably because
            they
            > are rather
            > > vanilla in appearance. It seems those on thicker stock are
            > especially difficult
            > > to locate.
            > >
            > > I'm curious about the PCGS statement, as well. I thought "Wrong
            > Stock" was an
            > > accepted term of art.
            > >
            > > Later......
            > > Steve
            > >
            > > Error Type Collection:
            > > http://www.five0central.com/ErrorCollection/Five0ErrorTypeSet.htm
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > _____
            > >
            > > From: errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com
            > > [mailto:errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
            Of
            > Travis
            > > Bolton
            > > Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 2:08 PM
            > > To: errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com
            > > Subject: [Error Coin Information Exchange] PCGS labels for wrong
            > stock coins
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > I just got Len's/Jim's auction 17 list. Before a large listing of
            > > wrong stock thickness errors there is a brief paragraph saying
            that
            > > PCGS is "still in the midst of deciding how to label wrong stock
            > > coins". I was wondering if anyone (Fred) might know more about
            this.
            > > Are the old descriptions being considered for a change so these
            > coins
            > > cannot be confused with strikes on the wrong planchet?
            > > ---Travis
            > >
            >
          • Mike Diamond
            First estimates: A half dollar struck on 40% half dollar stock rolled to quarter thickness should weigh approximately 9.68 grams. Weight on the table
            Message 5 of 11 , Nov 4, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              First estimates:

              A half dollar struck on 40% half dollar stock rolled to quarter
              thickness should weigh approximately 9.68 grams. Weight on the table
              published by Lonesome John is 9.16 grams. Something is seriously
              wrong with the latter estimate.

              A half dollar struck on clad quarter stock should weigh approximately
              9.03 grams. Lonesome John's table has the same weight here.



              --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
              <mdia1@...> wrote:
              >
              > Using simple algebra and elementary geometry, one can calculate the
              > expected weight for any wrong stock error.
              >
              > For example, this 1967 half dollar (which Steve obliquely referred
              > to) is much too light for Cu-Ni clad quarter stock, or 40% silver
              > half dollar stock rolled to quarter thickness. It is also too
              heavy
              > for Cu-Ni clad dime stock or 40% silver half dollar stock rolled to
              > dime thickness.
              >
              > http://tiny.bz/013g/
              >
              > I'll be back with the expected weights. I don't entirely trust the
              > published tables, either.
              >
              >
              > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Rich
              Schemmer"
              > <RichErrors@> wrote:
              > >
              > > Actually, without the exact weights and with many of the past
              wrong
              > > stock weight scales having been wrong. The correct term would be
              > > thick or thin planche, unless otherwised proved
              > >
              > > Thanx
              > > Rich Schemmer
              > > Rich Schemmer Error Coins
              > > http://WWW.RichErrors.com/store.php
              > > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Error
              Coins"
              > > <errorcoins@> wrote:
              > > >
              > > > Thanks for bring that to our attention, Travis. Unfortunately,
              > it's
              > > not on the
              > > > web site yet. I keep trying to complete my simplistic set, but
              > > can't seem to
              > > > find a clad 50 cent on quarter stock at a decent price (and
              from
              > > the looks of
              > > > one closing on eBay today, I may never!)
              > > >
              > > > I think these are seriously underappreciated, probably because
              > they
              > > are rather
              > > > vanilla in appearance. It seems those on thicker stock are
              > > especially difficult
              > > > to locate.
              > > >
              > > > I'm curious about the PCGS statement, as well. I thought "Wrong
              > > Stock" was an
              > > > accepted term of art.
              > > >
              > > > Later......
              > > > Steve
              > > >
              > > > Error Type Collection:
              > > >
              http://www.five0central.com/ErrorCollection/Five0ErrorTypeSet.htm
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > _____
              > > >
              > > > From: errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com
              > > > [mailto:errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
              > Of
              > > Travis
              > > > Bolton
              > > > Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 2:08 PM
              > > > To: errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com
              > > > Subject: [Error Coin Information Exchange] PCGS labels for
              wrong
              > > stock coins
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > I just got Len's/Jim's auction 17 list. Before a large listing
              of
              > > > wrong stock thickness errors there is a brief paragraph saying
              > that
              > > > PCGS is "still in the midst of deciding how to label wrong stock
              > > > coins". I was wondering if anyone (Fred) might know more about
              > this.
              > > > Are the old descriptions being considered for a change so these
              > > coins
              > > > cannot be confused with strikes on the wrong planchet?
              > > > ---Travis
              > > >
              > >
              >
            • Rich Schemmer
              Using simple algebra and elementary geometry, one can calculate the ... First estimates: Most of us out there haven t used college math for decades (ALG & EG
              Message 6 of 11 , Nov 4, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Using simple algebra and elementary geometry, one can calculate the
                > expected weight for any wrong stock error.
                First estimates:
                Most of us out there haven't used college math for decades (ALG &
                EG were only in advanced classes in High School back in my day..)

                If you can come up with some type of accuate table with simular tol.
                that the Mint uses, it would really benifit the hobby. That must of
                been an older NGC holder, as of fairly recently BOTh major services
                started using rolled thick & thin Planchets as to NOT to inflate the
                value of a coin unnecessarily

                --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
                <mdia1@...> wrote:
                >
                > First estimates:
                >
                > A half dollar struck on 40% half dollar stock rolled to quarter
                > thickness should weigh approximately 9.68 grams. Weight on the
                table
                > published by Lonesome John is 9.16 grams. Something is seriously
                > wrong with the latter estimate.
                >
                > A half dollar struck on clad quarter stock should weigh
                approximately
                > 9.03 grams. Lonesome John's table has the same weight here.
                >
                >
                >
                > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
                > <mdia1@> wrote:
                > >
                > > Using simple algebra and elementary geometry, one can calculate
                the
                > > expected weight for any wrong stock error.
                > >
                > > For example, this 1967 half dollar (which Steve obliquely
                referred
                > > to) is much too light for Cu-Ni clad quarter stock, or 40% silver
                > > half dollar stock rolled to quarter thickness. It is also too
                > heavy
                > > for Cu-Ni clad dime stock or 40% silver half dollar stock rolled
                to
                > > dime thickness.
                > >
                > > http://tiny.bz/013g/
                > >
                > > I'll be back with the expected weights. I don't entirely trust
                the
                > > published tables, either.
                > >
                > >
                > > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Rich
                > Schemmer"
                > > <RichErrors@> wrote:
                > > >
                > > > Actually, without the exact weights and with many of the past
                > wrong
                > > > stock weight scales having been wrong. The correct term would
                be
                > > > thick or thin planche, unless otherwised proved
                > > >
                > > > Thanx
                > > > Rich Schemmer
                > > > Rich Schemmer Error Coins
                > > > http://WWW.RichErrors.com/store.php
                > > > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Error
                > Coins"
                > > > <errorcoins@> wrote:
                > > > >
                > > > > Thanks for bring that to our attention, Travis.
                Unfortunately,
                > > it's
                > > > not on the
                > > > > web site yet. I keep trying to complete my simplistic set,
                but
                > > > can't seem to
                > > > > find a clad 50 cent on quarter stock at a decent price (and
                > from
                > > > the looks of
                > > > > one closing on eBay today, I may never!)
                > > > >
                > > > > I think these are seriously underappreciated, probably
                because
                > > they
                > > > are rather
                > > > > vanilla in appearance. It seems those on thicker stock are
                > > > especially difficult
                > > > > to locate.
                > > > >
                > > > > I'm curious about the PCGS statement, as well. I
                thought "Wrong
                > > > Stock" was an
                > > > > accepted term of art.
                > > > >
                > > > > Later......
                > > > > Steve
                > > > >
                > > > > Error Type Collection:
                > > > >
                > http://www.five0central.com/ErrorCollection/Five0ErrorTypeSet.htm
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > _____
                > > > >
                > > > > From: errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com
                > > > > [mailto:errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com] On
                Behalf
                > > Of
                > > > Travis
                > > > > Bolton
                > > > > Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 2:08 PM
                > > > > To: errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com
                > > > > Subject: [Error Coin Information Exchange] PCGS labels for
                > wrong
                > > > stock coins
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > I just got Len's/Jim's auction 17 list. Before a large
                listing
                > of
                > > > > wrong stock thickness errors there is a brief paragraph
                saying
                > > that
                > > > > PCGS is "still in the midst of deciding how to label wrong
                stock
                > > > > coins". I was wondering if anyone (Fred) might know more
                about
                > > this.
                > > > > Are the old descriptions being considered for a change so
                these
                > > > coins
                > > > > cannot be confused with strikes on the wrong planchet?
                > > > > ---Travis
                > > > >
                > > >
                > >
                >
              • Mike Diamond
                ... table ... I now see why our estimates are so divergent. Lonesome John assumes constant thickness throughout. I made no assumption about thickness, but
                Message 7 of 11 , Nov 4, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
                  <mdia1@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > First estimates:
                  >
                  > A half dollar struck on 40% half dollar stock rolled to quarter
                  > thickness should weigh approximately 9.68 grams. Weight on the
                  table
                  > published by Lonesome John is 9.16 grams. Something is seriously
                  > wrong with the latter estimate.

                  I now see why our estimates are so divergent. Lonesome John assumes
                  constant thickness throughout. I made no assumption about thickness,
                  but simply based my estimates on the changed densities. I would
                  think an estimated based on the fewest assumptions would be more
                  reliable.

                  In any case, both of our estimates are far greater than the weight on
                  the NGC slab.

                  > A half dollar struck on clad quarter stock should weigh
                  approximately
                  > 9.03 grams. Lonesome John's table has the same weight here.
                • Travis Bolton
                  I think an Excel program to perform all the calculations wouldn t be ALL that difficult to put together, for someone that is both computer and math savvy. I
                  Message 8 of 11 , Nov 4, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I think an Excel program to perform all the calculations wouldn't be
                    ALL that difficult to put together, for someone that is both computer
                    and math savvy. I pretty much know the math, it's essentially ratios,
                    but the computer skills I lack. It seems you could even factor in
                    weight tolerances and have the range of weight expected with any wrong
                    stock coin.







                    --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Rich Schemmer"
                    <RichErrors@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Using simple algebra and elementary geometry, one can calculate the
                    > > expected weight for any wrong stock error.
                    > First estimates:
                    > Most of us out there haven't used college math for decades (ALG &
                    > EG were only in advanced classes in High School back in my day..)
                    >
                    > If you can come up with some type of accuate table with simular tol.
                    > that the Mint uses, it would really benifit the hobby. That must of
                    > been an older NGC holder, as of fairly recently BOTh major services
                    > started using rolled thick & thin Planchets as to NOT to inflate the
                    > value of a coin unnecessarily
                    >
                    > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
                    > <mdia1@> wrote:
                    > >
                    > > First estimates:
                    > >
                    > > A half dollar struck on 40% half dollar stock rolled to quarter
                    > > thickness should weigh approximately 9.68 grams. Weight on the
                    > table
                    > > published by Lonesome John is 9.16 grams. Something is seriously
                    > > wrong with the latter estimate.
                    > >
                    > > A half dollar struck on clad quarter stock should weigh
                    > approximately
                    > > 9.03 grams. Lonesome John's table has the same weight here.
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
                    > > <mdia1@> wrote:
                    > > >
                    > > > Using simple algebra and elementary geometry, one can calculate
                    > the
                    > > > expected weight for any wrong stock error.
                    > > >
                    > > > For example, this 1967 half dollar (which Steve obliquely
                    > referred
                    > > > to) is much too light for Cu-Ni clad quarter stock, or 40% silver
                    > > > half dollar stock rolled to quarter thickness. It is also too
                    > > heavy
                    > > > for Cu-Ni clad dime stock or 40% silver half dollar stock rolled
                    > to
                    > > > dime thickness.
                    > > >
                    > > > http://tiny.bz/013g/
                    > > >
                    > > > I'll be back with the expected weights. I don't entirely trust
                    > the
                    > > > published tables, either.
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Rich
                    > > Schemmer"
                    > > > <RichErrors@> wrote:
                    > > > >
                    > > > > Actually, without the exact weights and with many of the past
                    > > wrong
                    > > > > stock weight scales having been wrong. The correct term would
                    > be
                    > > > > thick or thin planche, unless otherwised proved
                    > > > >
                    > > > > Thanx
                    > > > > Rich Schemmer
                    > > > > Rich Schemmer Error Coins
                    > > > > http://WWW.RichErrors.com/store.php
                    > > > > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Error
                    > > Coins"
                    > > > > <errorcoins@> wrote:
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Thanks for bring that to our attention, Travis.
                    > Unfortunately,
                    > > > it's
                    > > > > not on the
                    > > > > > web site yet. I keep trying to complete my simplistic set,
                    > but
                    > > > > can't seem to
                    > > > > > find a clad 50 cent on quarter stock at a decent price (and
                    > > from
                    > > > > the looks of
                    > > > > > one closing on eBay today, I may never!)
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > I think these are seriously underappreciated, probably
                    > because
                    > > > they
                    > > > > are rather
                    > > > > > vanilla in appearance. It seems those on thicker stock are
                    > > > > especially difficult
                    > > > > > to locate.
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > I'm curious about the PCGS statement, as well. I
                    > thought "Wrong
                    > > > > Stock" was an
                    > > > > > accepted term of art.
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Later......
                    > > > > > Steve
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Error Type Collection:
                    > > > > >
                    > > http://www.five0central.com/ErrorCollection/Five0ErrorTypeSet.htm
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > _____
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > From: errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com
                    > > > > > [mailto:errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com] On
                    > Behalf
                    > > > Of
                    > > > > Travis
                    > > > > > Bolton
                    > > > > > Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 2:08 PM
                    > > > > > To: errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com
                    > > > > > Subject: [Error Coin Information Exchange] PCGS labels for
                    > > wrong
                    > > > > stock coins
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > I just got Len's/Jim's auction 17 list. Before a large
                    > listing
                    > > of
                    > > > > > wrong stock thickness errors there is a brief paragraph
                    > saying
                    > > > that
                    > > > > > PCGS is "still in the midst of deciding how to label wrong
                    > stock
                    > > > > > coins". I was wondering if anyone (Fred) might know more
                    > about
                    > > > this.
                    > > > > > Are the old descriptions being considered for a change so
                    > these
                    > > > > coins
                    > > > > > cannot be confused with strikes on the wrong planchet?
                    > > > > > ---Travis
                    > > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > >
                    > >
                    >
                  • Mike Diamond
                    ... & ... There s really no excuse for such sloppiness. With all the money they make, the grading services could easily pay a high school student to do the
                    Message 9 of 11 , Nov 4, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Rich Schemmer"
                      <RichErrors@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > Using simple algebra and elementary geometry, one can calculate the
                      > > expected weight for any wrong stock error.
                      > First estimates:
                      > Most of us out there haven't used college math for decades (ALG
                      &
                      > EG were only in advanced classes in High School back in my day..)

                      There's really no excuse for such sloppiness. With all the money
                      they make, the grading services could easily pay a high school
                      student to do the calculations. They could even keep one on retainer.

                      > If you can come up with some type of accuate table with simular
                      tol.
                      > that the Mint uses, it would really benifit the hobby. That must
                      of
                      > been an older NGC holder, as of fairly recently BOTh major services
                      > started using rolled thick & thin Planchets as to NOT to inflate
                      the
                      > value of a coin unnecessarily.
                    • Mike Diamond
                      Half dollar thickness cannot be constant. The change in weight from 90% silver halves to 40% silver halves amounts to 1 gram or 8%. The change from 40%
                      Message 10 of 11 , Nov 5, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Half dollar thickness cannot be constant. The change in weight from
                        90% silver halves to 40% silver halves amounts to 1 gram or 8%. The
                        change from 40% silver halves to Cu-Ni clad halves amounts to 0.16
                        grams or 1.4%. That just doesn't compute.

                        Other calculations support my contention.

                        Assuming constant thickness, and using densities published in the
                        Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, the predicted weight of a 40%
                        silver half is 11.57 grams, when that weight is calculated against a
                        fixed weight of 12.5 grams for a 90% silver half. That's pretty darn
                        close to the published value of 11.5 grams for 40% silver halves.

                        However, the predicted weight of a Cu-Ni clad half ranges between
                        10.75 grams and 10.81 grams, depending on whether you use published
                        densities or densities calculated from the Handbook. Both
                        theoretical weights are well below the listed average of 11.34 grams
                        for Cu-Ni clad halves.

                        Conclusion: The planchet for Cu-Ni clad halves must be slightly
                        thicker than that of 90% silver halves or 40% silver halves.
                        Therefore, any wrong stock calculations that assume constant
                        thickness between 40% silver and Cu-Ni clad planchets are bound to be
                        incorrect.

                        N.B. The vast majority of wrong stock calculations do not assume
                        constant thickness, and are therefore likely to be correct in the
                        published tables. These tables are well-known and readily available
                        to the grading services, so it's curious that many of these services
                        do not consult them.
                      • Mike Diamond
                        Using published densities for 40% silver halves and Cu-Ni clad dimes, I calculate the weight of a dime struck on 40% silver half dollar stock rolled to dime
                        Message 11 of 11 , Nov 5, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Using published densities for 40% silver halves and Cu-Ni clad dimes,
                          I calculate the weight of a dime struck on 40% silver half dollar
                          stock rolled to dime thickness to be 2.44 grams. A half dollar
                          struck on such stock would weigh around 7.13 grams. So the NGC-
                          slabbed half dollar is much too heavy for this possibility at 7.91
                          grams.

                          The theoretical weight of a dime struck on dime-thickness 40% silver
                          stock a turns out to be the same when I use Handbook density values.

                          So, in the absence of any other data, it would seem that this half
                          dollar is struck on a planchet punched out of 40% silver half dollar
                          stock that was rolled way too thin.

                          There is no entry on Lonsome John's chart for this possibility, but
                          if there was one, it would have come out to an incorrect 6.75 grams.

                          --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
                          <mdia1@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Half dollar thickness cannot be constant. The change in weight
                          from
                          > 90% silver halves to 40% silver halves amounts to 1 gram or 8%.
                          The
                          > change from 40% silver halves to Cu-Ni clad halves amounts to 0.16
                          > grams or 1.4%. That just doesn't compute.
                          >
                          > Other calculations support my contention.
                          >
                          > Assuming constant thickness, and using densities published in the
                          > Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, the predicted weight of a 40%
                          > silver half is 11.57 grams, when that weight is calculated against
                          a
                          > fixed weight of 12.5 grams for a 90% silver half. That's pretty
                          darn
                          > close to the published value of 11.5 grams for 40% silver halves.
                          >
                          > However, the predicted weight of a Cu-Ni clad half ranges between
                          > 10.75 grams and 10.81 grams, depending on whether you use published
                          > densities or densities calculated from the Handbook. Both
                          > theoretical weights are well below the listed average of 11.34
                          grams
                          > for Cu-Ni clad halves.
                          >
                          > Conclusion: The planchet for Cu-Ni clad halves must be slightly
                          > thicker than that of 90% silver halves or 40% silver halves.
                          > Therefore, any wrong stock calculations that assume constant
                          > thickness between 40% silver and Cu-Ni clad planchets are bound to
                          be
                          > incorrect.
                          >
                          > N.B. The vast majority of wrong stock calculations do not assume
                          > constant thickness, and are therefore likely to be correct in the
                          > published tables. These tables are well-known and readily
                          available
                          > to the grading services, so it's curious that many of these
                          services
                          > do not consult them.
                          >
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.