Oldhoopster

Sorry to say but the core Layer is copper, which is found on cupronickel coins. The core layer of 40% silver is 21% silver and 79% copper and that alloy has a silvery color. Go compare the edge of your coin to that of other 1965-70 halves. You'll easily see that the core layer doesn't match I think that last piece of information showing the edge pic is all the proof you need to show it's the standard copper nickel alloy and not a transitional error

So you're saying that someone hacked the jewelry store XRF or convinced them to give misleading info? And this same group may Be hacking the TPGs? You do understand that the handheld XRF are stand alone units and don't require internet access to work. Sort of makes it hard to hack now, doesn't it. More info on handheld XRFs if you want to understand how they work. https://www.911metallurgist.com/blog/portable-xrf-analyzer-price You have offered no verifiable proof even though you've been offered expert advice. Maybe you should try trolling/scamming the other coin forums. Guarantee you'll get the same answers you got here

Wow. 3 cents apiece. They must have been the wheat cents of the 1890s

So you don't trust the XRF data that said it was copper nickel, but you did a test that damages the surface of the coin (your BST ad said you would dip it if desired ).

I think this guy is just trolling. He said the XRF said its cupronickel, but he doesn't believe it, but has no trouble believing an egg test. Just another lonely troll trying to get a rise out of the members

You have me confused. If you don't believe it's a copper planchet, why did you spam multiple old threads with this? You keep posting about transitional errors. Why? There are many extremely knowledgeable numismatists on this forum that can help you. But don't play games. That's the quickest way for a new collector to get ignored BTW. Only a handful of transitional 1983 planchets have been authenticated out 775,000,000 minted. You have a better odds of hitting the Powerball than you do of finding one

No need to post in multiple old threads. As I said in your other post, let's see some close up focused pics and XRF data. Without authentication from a TPG, your coin is worth 1 cent, regardless of how many times you post on a coin forum. Or, just send it to NGC

The only way it will be worth anything is to have it authenticated by a TPG. Until then you just have a 1983 cent in an unverifiable picture. Worth one cent without verification. Did you get an XRF scan? XRF will penetrate the 8 micron thick copper plating and will easily show if it's a zinc or copper blank. Take a closeup pic of the coin. It's usually pretty easy to tell if there are plating anomolies. I would think somebody with a potential 4-5 figure coin would do more than just post "look at my blog". Let's see some good pics and XRF data.

The composition of the flying eagle is 88% copper and 12% nickel. Your coins are just showing lots of environmental damage, nothing more

Class IX doubling from the single squeeze process has always been difficult for me to determine. Most are very minor and it's hard to pick out characteristics like split serifs. I agree with what @The Neophyte Numismatist said, go to www.doubleddie.com and look for an EXACT match

If you are paying to take a college course, why do you want to have someone do the work and learning for you? How are you going to learn anything by having others do your work for you. If you don't want to do the work, drop the course

I use www.coinsandcanada.com for their price guide which I think is decent but haven't used much else on the site. If you're trying to convince members that your opinion is correct, you need to post some, data, links or other proof. Especially if you're going to rely on poor quality pics and then belittle the members for disagreeing like @foundit did.

Lots of wear for a gold coin. Unlikely worth more than bullion value

All we have is your opinion. How about some pics or links of this type of error. Surely there must be something out there. Anything already attributed in a slab? Anything describing this type of error in a reference like www.error-ref.com ? Any postings on the various sites from byers, or diamond, or Weinberg talking about this type of error? Things like that will add credibility to your opinion. You could start by posting some decent pics of your coin. The OP pics do a great job of showing the background but leave the actual coin small and blurry

@pigeonman333rd Not sure what you're looking at, but the counterstamped coin in the OP is a normal copper plated zinc cent What type of rare transitional cent did you find? RWB is the author of a book on experimental and pattern coins from WW II

I understand where you're coming from. I can recall a few instances over the years where the consensus opinion has been wrong, but in those limited occurrences, it was an unusual, seldom encountered error, and there were always a few knowledgeable people who were contrarians. But you could probably count them on one hand. This example is incredibly obvious to all but the newest collector. While we try to do our best to answer ALL questions as accurately as possible, if the OP disagrees, shouldn't we give him other options? Just my thoughts

Disagree with your comment. When multiple experienced members are all in agreement that a coin is damaged, but the new collector still disagrees, then authentication by a TPG (or CONECA) would be the next step. Sometimes tuition can be expensive, but different people learn in different ways. Just my opinion. Your mileage may vary

No, just high school, then recreational leagues until I was in my 40s. I was a hack, but loved to play. Jr Hoopster plays Division 3. One more year left but he is already on the Top 25 list for scoring and rebounds at his school

Sorry, but I don't see any die clash. You can confirm that by looking at the overlay that @Just Bob posted. @Sandon provided a good explanation of why you don't have a filled die. It's not uncommon to find this striking weakness on the reverse of many Lincoln Memorial cents and it's not considered an error, just normal process variability I can't see anything regarding doubling. You need to be showing the characteristics of true doubling such as split serifs and widening, vs flat and shelflike and thinning. Not sure what I'm talking about? I strongly suggest you go www.doubleddie.com and study the info in the tabs. Until you can tell the difference between true die doubling and mechanical doubling and die deterioration, you'll just keep spinning your wheels You shouldn't worry about value. If your searching for errors to make money, you're in the wrong racket. Most of the minor die breaks, clashes, and filled dies have no premium. Even most minor Doubled dies have little or no value. If you find something you can sell on eBay for a buck or two, your doing well. Finding a $5-10 error is hitting the jackpot and may only occur every few years. Once again, the key is knowing if you have an error and not wasting your time on coins like the one you posted

There are a lot of things you can do if you're 6'8" Sorry, but I'm hijacking the thread for some pics of Jr hoopster.

@messydesk runs VamWorld. I've seen him here occasionally but he usually is on the other boards. He's a very helpful guy

But an accurate response Since an error has to occur during the minting or die making process, would you please explain where and how this error occurred? Many members who are extremely Knowledgeable of the minting process have said that this cannot occur at the mint. Can you provide additional information on how you believe this occurred? Will be waiting for your input

Would you please clarify this? You wrote P.S. You opened the door, counselor! Please don't start any nonsense You made a statement that basically said we should stop a providing people with information Why don't we abandon the paternity test approach, and just celebrate the fact that this is a lovely example of a 90% silver half dollar, and leave it at that. I just wanted to find out if that's what you really thought or if you just got lost in the moment

So what it sounds like you're saying is that we should stop answering questions and just tell people that they have pretty coins. I'm not sure how well that will work.

As @RWB said, analytical equipment is only as good as the people running it. They need regular calibration, and don't even think about using the handhelds for any trace analysis. The algorithms are set up for bulk materials If you think you have an off composition planchet, check the weight. Simple enough