EagleRJO

Definitely looks like it's a Cu-Ni planchet as expected since it would be closer to 9.5 if 40% silver clad. But maybe just double check that next time you are in a coin or jewelry shop with an XRF due to the edge appearance.

With a 88% Cu & 12% Ni composition probably more of a lighter metallic somewhat brownish color newly struck like the attached or a little lighter similar to a mid-1800's Cu-Ni three-cent or five-cent piece, and more of a brownish color toned like those shown on CoinFacts for various grades. https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1859-1c/images/2052 The op's cent looks dipped, chemically cleaned or scrubbed, or otherwise altered in appearance if it's even legit.

Showing cropped pics of both sides would be helpful, but it looks like a 1859 Indian Head Cent that is pretty worn. It may be altered or a reproduction as it's a silver like off-color. https://www.ngccoin.com/coin-explorer/united-states/cents/indian-cents-1859-1909/12057/1859-1c-ms/

Both NGC and PCG$ list SMS strikes for the 2006-D 5C, where perhaps the meaning is "Special Mint Strike" ... https://www.ngccoin.com/coin-explorer/united-states/nickels/jefferson-five-cents-1938-date/822432/2006-d-sms-5c-ms/?des=ms https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/2006-d-5c-monticello-satin-finish/94163 The PCG$ guide prices have really been wacked out lately (and thus the $ for the S ). They adjusted guide prices way up during the pandemic spike and never corrected them when prices came back down to reality. The NGC guide prices, or maybe just a bit above that, have been much closer to what coins are going for in auctions.

I don't mess around with anything other than acetone which is chemically inert. Isn't olive oil somewhat "acidic"? [Actually I really should say acetone is chemically "neutral" since it will remove things like fingerprints and organics, but is not an acid or base that will attack the coin]

Yea, I saw that. He must be slacking. When you're #1 someone is always gunning for you.

If you want to see some amazing nickels check out Lem's registry sets, which are world class collections. Here is one ... https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/337377/

I don't see anything spectacular either, but that's not really a series I know well, and from watching other GC auction people go ga-ga over little listing things like a "toned" coin.

Those are both listed as being "toned" which go for more.

Agreed I don't know where you got the idea to use a toothbrush (probably a you tube vid), but that was a mistake you hopefully will not make again. If it turns out to be an error coin you have likely devalued it by causing very fine hairlines that would result in you getting a "Details" grade. My three basic rules for coin collecting: Always carefully handle and store coins NEVER clean a coin Know the coin before you buy the coin Note that when handling cons hold them by the edges or use cotton/nitrile gloves, and I don't consider soaking a coin in acetone to remove fingerprints and loose organics "cleaning" or "dipping".

I agree that the coin looks like someone ground down the rims to the core on the obverse and ground out the devices on the reverse which caused what appears to be raised rims. Its a common misconception that a coin in a commercial dryer can get stuck in a vertical position between the inner and outer drums of a commercial dryer, where the space is narrower than the coin diameter, which then pushes in the edges of a coin similar to "spooning". It just cant happen if you think about it. If the space between the drums is less than the diameter the coin, then the coin would never get in a vertical position as there is nothing forcing the con to fit in that smaller space. Dryer coins can have rims at the edge of a coin that are flattened, like the attached 1985 quarter, caused by the coin sliding around flatwise for quite a while on the hot commercial dryer drums. Coins usually just slide around, and if the coin diameter is smaller than the space between the drums it might occasionally roll around (see the attached diagram). But that wouldn't push the edges inward much, unlike spooning a coin. https://boards.ngccoin.com/topic/429492-spooned-coins/#comment-9828185

I don't see any recent auction results for that coin (that are not toned, don't have a "★" or "FS" designation, or not an error) from various auction sites, except one that went for $70 recently on ebay. There are some MS65PL in the $200 range on GC but they're toned, "★", "FS", or errors and the MS66PL coins (without anything special) seem to be the ones in the $200 range. https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1942-s-5c-pl/94017 GC Auction Records 1942-S War Nickels When it comes to Nickels @Lem E knows what he is talking about.

You would lose money submitting it for grading, which would cost around $80 for just that coin. It's very difficult to assign a number grade just from pics which are not even high resolution. You could go to CoinFacts - 1C Lincoln Wheat Reverse and look for various G graded 1C coins around that date to compare with the coin in-hand, but I think it's a time waste and would just put it in a flip or album, with any rotation over 15 degrees noted, and call it "Good".

I don't think just weighing the coin is very useful here since a 1971-D 50C on a normal Cu-Ni planchet with a specified weigh of 11.34g could weigh up to 11.79g and still be within mint tolerances, while a 50C on an earlier date 40% silver clad planchet has a specified weight of 11.50g. They are just too close in weight. The mint changed the type of metal used for 50C blanks in 1971 to a Copper-Nickel (Cu-Ni) metal, so there are some transitional metal error coins from the beginning of 1971 known to exist that were stuck on the previous years 40% silver clad planchets, like the attached. It's one of the things I look for when going through rolls of older 50C coins. The first thing to do is look carefully at the edge to see if there is any evidence of the pure copper core used with the Cu-Ni coins. See the attached pic showing how the edges for various composition 50C coins typically look. The pic you posted is not very good or cropped around the coin so it shows up blurry from your post, and there may be some crud on the edges hiding the core which might be removed by soaking the coin in acetone. There have been suspected planchet error coins with an apparent darker silver like colored edge posted on the forum which turned out to be struck on a normal Cu-Ni planchet. So before you spend around $100 submitting the coin to NGC I would recommend that you either take it to a shop that can do an XRF test of the coin composition or do a specific gravity (SG) test. You can do a rudimentary SG test which is fairly simple to do with an accurate scale (+/- 0.01g), a small plastic cup or piece of a plastic bottle with water (so you can see the coin is not touching the cup), and a piece of thread. The SG for a 40% silver clad coin is 9.53 and the SG for a Cu-Ni coin is 8.92. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EN3tlmQSUuI&t=4s

@Buy A. Coin Something like the attached side-by-side comparison with numerals from a 1927 and 1937 1C and transparent overlay with a "3" to verify that the damaged "2" on your 1927 1C is the wrong size and shape to be a "3". It is pretty simple to do with certified examples from NGC or PCG$ and free apps like IrfanView and Paint. On the overlay note where the middle of the "3" and notch at the back are. With some experience, and doing enough side-by-side comparisons and overlays like I did, you should be able to see the differences without even doing transparent overlays or side-by-side comparisons. I don't save them like I did for this post as an example, I just use the apps to look and then close them out. Did you submit the coin to PCG$ thinking it was an "error" with the date and you were surprised by what you got back?

I think you meant to ask if that was a 1937/27 cent with a re-punched date (RPD) and not an error. Regardless, there is no shot at a RPD with that date, and the "3" would be the wrong size and shape. It is just a cleaned and damaged 1927 cent, which took a hit on the "2" and moved the soft copper metal. And you can check out a 1937 cent on NGC Coin Explorer to verify the numbers wouldn't match.

There are coins that meet mint tolerances and specifications (non-errors), coins with minor errors that are not significant enough to be certified by a TPG, and coins with errors that are significant enough to be certified by a TPG. I think the op's coin falls into the middle category, along with coins that have die rotations slightly less than 15 degrees.

Have you compared it to images on CoinFacts, and can you point out where you think there is doubling as I'm not seeing it. Keep in mind the bottom of the ear lobe and other areas normally have two lines or parts, I think to give it depth and a raised appearance.

I haven't had those issues lately. Maybe try making sure your browser and OS are updated, and your cache is not cleared every time you close out the browser, but is still periodically cleared.

Seems to me that if a coin is missing legally required lettering, regardless of it being caused by misaligned dies from the hubbing or misaligned dies in the coining press, that it would still be considered an error coin, although a minor one in this case. Not sure if either way it would be referred to as a MAD, although I think that is intended to refer to misaligned dies in the coining press. It also seems more likely to have occurred at a coining press, particularly with over-used worn dies that can work loose, as opposed to that occurred during the hubbing process and either someone at the mint not looking at the results of the master hubbing or worse looking at the results and calling an offset like that good. At least up until the last few years where quality at the mint actually meant something.

The 40% silver clad half dollars struck from 1965 to 1970 didn't have a pure copper core like the 1971 and later half dollars (except 1976). The 1965 to 1970 "silver clad" coins have a mixed 21% silver (Ag) and 79% copper (Cu) core that has a darker color, but it's not copper in appearance. They also have a lighter colored 80% Ag and 20% Cu outer cladding, that brings it to 40% Ag overall. You should at least get a copy of a recent Red Book which has this composition info, along with weights, if you don't have one already. See the attached example of how the edges for the various composition half dollars appear. The edge of your coin appears consistent with a 40% silver clad half dollar, with a somewhat darker but not copper colored center. If you weigh the coin with at least a 1/10th gram accuracy (1/100th gram preferable) that should verify the composition is 40% silver clad. While just about anything is possible, it would be extremely unlikely for a 1967 50C to be struck on a 90% silver planchet. Stranger things have happened, but that is suspected to be intentional "mischief" by some graveyard shift mint workers. As far as I know the half dollars incorrectly struck on a 90% silver planchet (called a "transitional error") were all at the beginning of 1965 when the change was first made to the 40% silver clad blanks. I can imagine there being a possibility that at the beginning of 1965 there were still some leftover 50C blanks or coils at the mint with the 90% silver composition which either were intentionally used up or just used by mistake to strike some half dollars. However, by 1967 the chances of there still being 90% silver 50C blanks or coils at the mint are virtually zero.

Looks like crickets after the op claimed a few days ago they were going to run down to a dealer the next morning to have it looked at, as I think they know they would be challenged for the dealers' name and to submit it to a TPG if they claimed the bozo verified what they were claiming, ultimately with the same end result of crickets. After that much bravado how could anyone have the balls to admit they were wrong and stop trolling.

There are only two 1982-D copper small date cents to use as examples, with those part of the attached infographic put together for identifying the difference. This is included in the pinned resources topic, and the op has been repeatedly provided this along with clear descriptions on identifying that rare coin by multiple members in multiple topics about the same coin they keep claiming to have found. However, the op has repeatedly ignored the information provided, and then decided to fraudulently post the worthless cents they have for sale as being something valuable. I think they are just trolling members, or as some others have suggested they are possibly just too dense to understand the information provided.

Interesting that you're not even a novice collector but noticed the coin struck with a rotated die. Particularly since if you turn the coin over horizontally (instead of vertically) it would be almost right side up, which may not seem unusual to the average person. It was finding unusual things like that, very old coins or exceptionally shiny coins going through jars of pocket change that got me interested in coin collecting. Maybe the start of a new hobby for you, in which case maybe get some mylar flips like the attached to put the coin in. But if not, still a nice find!

It looks like the only doubled die 2005-P 5C Bison recognized by the big boys or assigned an FS number is DDO-001 or FS-101 (see attached pics) http://varietyvista.com/04c JN DD Vol 3 WJ/2005PDDO001 Bison Nickel.htm https://www.ngccoin.com/variety-plus/united-states/nickels/jefferson-five-cents-1938-date/819709/ You can actually see the doubling on that coin, with the others being barely noticeable or carrying any significant premium. If you are really into doubled dies knock yourself out, but I really don't see the significance or appeal of the others to collectors in general where you need significant magnification to even identify that.