l.cutler

Welcome to the forum. All of the anomalies you mention are from split plating. The thin copper plating splits when the coin is struck exposing the zinc core. This is not considered an error, just the result of the use of copper coated zinc for coinage.

I have only one as a type coin. It would be interesting to get into the varieties, probably a fertile area to pick some rarer ones.

Welcome to the forum. Picture is very blurry, and you will need to explain what you see as an error. It looks like there is damage to the coin, but better pictures will help.

It really depends on what you consider a collector. I think what I would call "true collectors", it would be a much higher percentage reading the books. I have dozens that I use regularly, some are actually falling apart. I doubt any of the "I watched a you tube video what is this worth" do or will read any numismatic books. You can't even convince them to buy a redbook, they just keep coming back to the forums with "what about this one".

Well he keeps checking in here but won’t reply or post the pictures, read what you want into that!

Spot of contaminant, and the start of corrosion.

It's large, once you note the differences they are super easy to identify. I always look at the shape of the 2 and the distance of the 2 from the rim.

Tumbling planchets to clean them up?

Haunting the coin forums, studying the coins I already have, researching coins I would like to get.

Not sure what you feel is odd about it. It is the normal mint mark for a 1964 Half dollar minted in Denver.

I've got quite an assortment of Colonial and state coinage and have collected them for years. Someday I have to get smart enough to post pictures! I'd be glad to answer any questions you may have though!

I'm not seeing anything either, you really need to point out what you feel is an error.

It's been exposed to some kind of acid, it affects the inner copper core more than the outer copper nickel layers.

I really like the large cents, but haven't really delved into varieties too much on them, but I know there are good references out there for them. The Whitman Encyclopedia of Colonial and Early American Coins is a good basic one to cover pre Federal coins. For specifically Connecticut Coppers I use The Identification and classification of Connecticut coppers by Randall P. Clark, an amazing book.

OK, got it Hoghead515, it is a 33.31-gg.2. That is a little better variety, it is a high R5, R5 is 31-75 estimated examples, and high R5 would be closer to the 31 end of that range. A lot of the Connecticut varieties are in the R5 range, when you start getting into the R6's they get a little pricier. Nice coin, I like it!

Those pictures should do it, I’ll look into it later today when I get home, easier to see on a computer screen! That’s actually a pretty nice one, should be fairly easy to Id.

Hoghead, if you want, post pictures of your Connecticut copper. If there is enough detail I can ID the variety for you. You never know, it could be one of the rarer ones.

This brings back so many memories of my earlier days of collecting. There was a small coin case in a local newspaper shop. I spent a ton of time in there as a kid. I still have a few coins in their original 2x2's, with prices. Silver S mint Washington quarters for 45 cents! I also did a Franklin half set years ago, I still love those coins!

The earliest I remember was much like your story. My father had an old desk and I found an 1884 Swiss coin in it. He also had an old leather pouch with a few circulated Morgan dollars. I still have that Swiss coin today, some 55 or so years later. My Uncle then gave me and my brother each a Booker T. Washington, Washington Carver half and a few type coins. I have been collecting ever since. I bought a 1788 New Jersey copper from one of the coin magazines when I was 12 or 13, and some 10 or 15 years later, I got into colonial and state coinage, collecting them by type. I drifted into New Jersey coppers by variety, but they were just too expensive. I've dabbled with Hibernia coppers, large cents, Rosa Americana, but right now it is Connecticut coppers by variety, and 1640 countermarked French coins which are fascinating. I also have somewhat started a Barber Half album because my son showed an interest in them so we each started one. I have a small collection of Confederate currency, but that has been inactive for quite a few years. Quite eclectic, but that is the way I am I guess! Great thread and I hope it keeps going.

One whole cent! Perfectly normal.

No it isn't worth it. Pretty much worth face value, 1964 had huge mintages so it is very common.

Sorry to see you go, but can understand. This forum seems to draw more of it's share of trolls than the others. I signed off and left for a while, but came back and reluctantly started using the ignore feature. Not my favorite thing to do, but does make it more tolerable.

I see no reason why there would be a weight tolerance for slabs, they weigh what they weigh and it makes no difference to the manufacturer. There are many variables that could and most likely do affect the weight. There is no reason whatsoever to suspect a 90% silver planchet.

The question of what test would prove it has been answered numerous times, send it to a TPG. The next closest thing would be the XRF. If you think there was an error the first time, then get a second or even third opinion, have it done by someone else, pretty simple.

Yep, any collector of copper knows what sulfur can do!