EagleRJO

I must have been thinking that because they replaced the circulating Presidential dollars. And when you look up circulating coins it refers you to the spec table which has the Innovation dollars. https://www.usmint.gov/learn/coin-and-medal-programs/circulating-coins I ran into the issue of worn or gunked up edge lettering with the Presidential dollars from rolls and have been getting them from dealers or direct from the mint since, so I'm not sure what they are currently striking for circulation.

From when the blank is punched out. And you definitely need a new scale as +/- 1g isn't going to cut it.

I like them and have all the marks and strikes thru 2023, as one of the few modern coins I collect are dollar coins. I'm pretty sure @Hoghead515 collects them too. Some may not realize they are the circulating dollars to be issued if needed by the mint following completion of the Presidential dollar coins. But the thing I think could have been designed better is the obverse. While I like the large Liberty figure, the top area is a little barren, as if everything was liquid and drained to the bottom. I think they should have spaced things out better, and put the year and mark on the obverse like most of the other coins instead on on the edge. Like the Presidential dollars the year and mark are lightly punched incuse on the edge, which is the first thing to wear off or get gunked up.

That's a nice error coin with multiple significant errors which is unusual. If you plan on selling it I think it would be worth submitting to give it more legitimacy. And if you found that in a roll I would go back and try to grab more rolls to search through as it can't be the only one. A lot of people like those quarters too because it has Wilma's nickname "Mankiller" on it, which I think is pretty cool too. And I like that they beat the snot out of those dies. Makes for some good error coins, which are getting scarse, and it makes me think the mint is getting its money's worth out of those dies.

I don't see anything wrong with collectors grading coins themselves, which they should do anyway even with the big boys slabs, and self-slabbing them like with the dark green CW slabs JPM posted. I do that myself like with the attached, as do others, to protect and identify coins since the vast majority of the coins in my collection are raw. But I draw the line when basement-slabbers try to make them look like a legit reputable TPG slab, such as the white one with the yellow label JPM posted or the one originally posted from the show that both have a bar code and everything. I'm glad the OP called that guy out at the show hawking them as being a top grading company slab, as should others when you see stuff like that.

It does look like the coin has a die chip at "Liberty", not a doubled die. You can find out more about these at the following sites ... https://www.error-ref.com/ https://doubleddie.com/

I can't see any "R" either. Where?

Interesting that you found a Canuck 5C piece. I haven't seen a lot of foreign coins in change lately.

I don't think the intent was to say you did anything. Did you get the coin direct from the mint in 2002 and had it ever since? If so then the appearance is just an anomaly as struck thru grease coins typ don't look like that. If not you would be surprised what people will do to alter coins or make them look like errors including grinding on them with dremel tools, pressing objects or other coins against them in a vice, resealing packaging, dipping them in chemicals or rubbing things on them, baking them in an oven ... you name it.

I think you are getting faked out by using the scope, with that lighting and reflections giving the appearance of something else. Looking at the second photo does not give the same indications as your first magnified scope picture. If you just looked at it with a 10x loupe or glass with normal lighting I think it wouldn't look the same. And as Sandon noted there are no listed OMMs for this 1976 quarter, so discovering a new one while technically possible, isn't very likely.

What Coinbuf said. The coin does look a little like it was altered due to the color and texture change around the missing characters.

With a thick skin amd sence of humor you should fit right in here. Yes, as noted consider your initial "tuition paid in full". Maybe put that on a flip label as a future reminder. Hopefully there won't be any further installments. If you don’t mind me asking how did you acquire this coin as the impression is you are stuck with it. Perhaps passed down, or bought on Etsy/eBay on a whim one bored night a while ago and you are just now looking more closely at it. In any case hopefully reboot your coin collecting adventure with a better start listening to the sage advice of very experienced collectors who will say to "know the coin before buying the coin", starting with the attached references and the topics Sandon linked above. 😉

Compare the coin to certified genuine examples for an 1877-S T$1 shown on NGC Coin Explorer or PCG$ CoinFacts [like the attached]. Not only is the reverse wrong as noted but they mixed up the Type-1/Type-2 obverse details. Having the wrong reverse is a classic counterfeit indicator. And I doubt it weighs 420 grains (27.22 grams), stated right on the coin, so you could put it on a scale with a 0.01g accuracy. If you recently purchased this coin I hope you can still return it, and stick with certified coins in the future.

I'm just curious if you happen to see some of the other recent topics on clad coins such as a modern quarter with a brown discoloration and figured you would ask about this one? There is one recent topic with a discolored coin that might have an error, but the conditions are very different.

Welcome. That one is significantly damaged such that even if there were errors the damage has obliterated any signs of that. If you are looking for error coins I would start with coins that are in better condition to begin with and spend some time on error-ref.com learning about various types of errors and ways coins can be damaged first.

Have you tried searching the dealer listings available thru the TPG's websites? Also, if you are having trouble following Sandon's descriptions or noting differences between the NGC VP images you can find annotated half dime die variety images that can be helpful in pinpointing specific ones, like the attached for an LM-1 and LM-3 which you narrowed it down to. I agree with Sandon your coin looks like an LM-1.

Just keep in mind that while PCG$ will straight grade chopmarked Trade Dollars, NGC and many collectors consider chopmarked coins damaged. I have also encountered quite a lot of counterfeit Trade Dollars, even chopmarked ones, so you have to be very careful with acquiring those coins.

Trade Dollars were intended to be used in Asia for trading, and thus the name. So to me the chop marks give it history and pretty much confirm that's what it was being used for. I can look at a chopmarked Trade Dollar and imagine either a dark dingy room at an Asian port with a trader sitting at an old wood table punching his mark on the coin or someone leaning up against a ship in an Asian port flipping one of these up in the air while waiting for his ship to be loaded.

I was referring to your claims in this topic about there being an "exchange of copper" such that the coin was "covered in copper molecules", regardless of what you want to call it. At what reputable source can I read about this "science" you are claiming is the case here.

I do collect Morgans and chopmarked Trade Dollars, in addition to older half dollars as well as some gold coins and modern dollar coins, and prefer more of the bright or natural grey color for the silver coins. Maybe a slightly duller grey color for older circulated coins something like the attached from my collection, but that is about the extent of any "toned" coins. I don't really go for either the darker toned coins or even the rainbow colored ones some go gaga over. Probably why this coin wouldn't really be one for me.

Just not not my taste I guess as that stained blotchy appearance really isn't for me.

If that is "science" where is the reputable source for reading about this molecular copper effervescence?

The mint specs for a 1978-D 25C are a 5.670g weight and 24.26mm diameter. Is the weight of 3.218g and 24mm diameter of the original coin posted, or the coin photographed in your last post? This type of confusion is why it's recommended to just post one coin per topic. In any event, if the 3.218g weight is for the original quarter posted it might indicate completely missing clad layers. Since it doesn't have an acid damaged appearance [including that the edge reeding and rims are still substantially intact], it might be a poor bond of the cladding which came off before striking, which would be a significant error if that is in fact what happened [on both sides, as missing cladding errors are usually only on one side]. Have you posted the coin with the weight to the CONECA board, and if so what did they have to say about the coin? If they are still reviewing the coin you may want to also take some better photos of the edge at a slight angle to show both the appearance and color with substantially intact reeding and rims which may be helpful.

That weight doesn't make sense. Can you post a weight with at least a 0.01g accuracy? The mint spec for this 1971-D 50C with a 75% Cu & 25% Ni cladding over a solid copper core is 11.340g. I suspect with the minor corrosion shown that it has lost a little weight, but it may not be significant enough to be outside the weight tolerance of 0.454g for that coin. Hmmm, is it that the coin "has 'lost' its clad layer" or is it that "the clad layer is still there"? Looks to me like it was in the ground and simply has some surface corrosion, with a weight I am guessing will be just slightly less than the mint spec weight. And you are just describing the method of corrosion. There is nothing there about any "exchange of copper" or being "covered in copper molecules" which sounds like your much vaulted "molecular copper effervescences" process you keep mistakenly referring to for any brown colored clad coin, without any valid source to explain your incorrect theory that the solid copper core migrates through the solid Cu-Ni cladding to the surface of the coin. No it's not.

There doesn't seem to be a lot of wear, but darker colored toning aside I'm just curious why you would want to add such an impaired coin to your collection with so much visible verdigris and staining?