Do you buy blast white 150 year old coins?

[SkyMan]

I was at the SF Mint today for the show. I've been trying to put together a business strike set of 1858 material (no gold). I saw a nice PCGS MS63 1858-O half dollar, but it was blast white. While it had obviously been dipped, the luster was still there and the coin looked nice. Even though it was a nice looking coin, for me a coin from that era should look like it's been around... not blast white... so I passed on it. How about you, will you buy an older coin if it is blast white? Obviously there are plenty of blast white Morgans out there, but I'm talking about other series where a coin will generally have some sort of an "aged" skin.

[Bugmann1974]

Yes, depending on price, condition and need.

 

Though I will pay more for and jump at a more original piece first.

[World Colonial]

It depends upon the series, but I generally prefer toned coins for my older series like most collectors on this board apparently do.

 

But the fact of the matter is that there are so few specimens available for the coins I buy, I have to buy what is available. I recently acquire a 1628 Spain 2 reales AU-UNC which is untoned. I assume it was either lightly cleaned or dipped in the past but it is not unattractive, just less so than a toned one probably would have been.

[cpm9ball]

Obviously there are plenty of blast white Morgans out there, but I'm talking about other series where a coin will generally have some sort of an "aged" skin.

 

I wonder if there were ever any original bags of old halves or quarters stashed in some old bank for 50-75 years. Surely these coins couldn't all have been in rolls. Why haven't we ever heard of someone finding a hoard of them?

 

Chris

[michael]

i TOTALLY dislike DIPPED OUT BLASTY WHITE 100-150+ YEAR OLD SILVER, BUSINESS STRIKE COINAGE

 

 

pass.............................................

 

 

even moreso if the business strike coin has that urine (ginger ale) colored dip residue toning from an improper rinse.......... take a look at others collections and around the bourse and in dealers shops and auction companies lot offerings they are available by the TON THESE ARE A BIG NO BUENO PASS PASS BIG TIME

 

original skin or nice secondary eye appealling toning with no hairlines underneath the toning to be much more acceptable and more in demand when passing onto the next generation of collectors/dealers who want to "pay the adoption fee" for my un-blast white babee-- THIS IS WHAT I WILL ONLY CONSIDER WITH BUSINESS STRIKE COINS OF THIS pre 1915 ERA

 

 

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

 

now silver 100-150+ YEAR OLD proof coins are another matter entirely as these coins were made for collectors on specially prepaired planchets with mirror finishes and with usually more tonnage to the strike if not double struck then if the coin is totally blast white from a dipping BUT it has crisp, clear, deep mirrors with absolutely

 

1-- NO haze

2--NO cloudiness

3--and very choice+/gem proof or above as any hairlines on dipped white proof coins usually spoils it for me

4--NO urine colored toning (as per the above)

5-- NEEDS TO HAVE EXCEPTIONAL FLASH AND BLAST

 

is totally blast white no hint of toning anywhere and has been in the holder ngc/pcgs for a few years and is still not turning as it was properly dipped and then PROPERLY rinsed off/neutralized this is acceptable for me with proof coins but then again i find this overall :look: to be really scarce to rare with 19th century proof silver coins

 

good luck and i hope everyone finds an overall "look" that pleases your eye and collecting parameters

 

 

[physics-fan3.14]

Well put michael. The answer is no - I generally can't afford the MS stuff, and dipped white circulated coinage is butt ugly. I don't like the dipped white UNC stuff either - I want a coin with a nice original patina. It doesn't have to be thick, it doesn't have to be toned really, just as long as it doesn't look bright chemical white.

[johnny9434]

I'm with Michael on this one

[PerryHall]

Blast white 150 year old coins look weird and unnatural so I would have to say no unless it was priced cheap.

[James_OldeTowne]

I have so often explained to folks that (ignoring Morgan dollars) few things in numismatics look dumber than a blast-white coin from the 19th century. Of course, we all know there are exceptions, and for one reason or another, a few stragglers survived blast white, but one would think from the amount of blast-white material in slabs that it was the rule, rather than the exception.

 

What I hate most of all is blast-white capped-bust coins. I can't stand them, because those were NEVER saved in rolls, and there's just simply no excuse for such a coin to survive without toning except in the most extreme circumstances.

 

EDITED to add:

 

No kidding, I believe EVERY blast-white BU capped-bust coin should automatically be relegated to a "details only" problem holder with "cleaned" as the disclaimer.

[WinstonWare]

No. You strip the coin, you strip the history, you strip my interest. Might as well be a modern day restrike...JMHO

[Hard Times]

I have a blast white Trade Dollar in MS63. I have many silver specimens that were clearly dipped some time in the past and then retoned to variable degrees. I like them all. In reality, the majority of 19th century silver would be pretty much black today if no dipping occurred, unless they were isolated from the atmosphere for decades to centuries. So I am guessing that most silver from this period probably has been dipped at one time or another, and possibly several times. Thaz what experts like Bowers say in their books, Weimar White also notes this in his book. Having said that, toned (i.e. retoned) silver if taken care of and isolated from the atmosphere is very nice as noted in earlier posts here. Nice retoning typically is what is called as 'original' surfaces from my understanding of what the so-called experts are saying.

 

Here is one with nice retoning, it has an incredible flash to it:

 

 

I got it at a heritage auction on the cheap - folks don't appear to like the deeply toned specimens with close to 'original' skin

 

On the other hand, here is a wonderful bustie with modest retoning, clearly dipped in the past, yet had to pay over ask at a Heritage auction because there were bidders galore:

 

 

So I like the dipped coins, even the blast white ones if still having rich texture, and I think the bidders in major auctions tend to like them also. But each coin has its own character and one has to decide if that character is in line with your preferences......

 

[Hard Times]

Would I buy this blast white coin if I had the spare coin to buy it?

 

Well yes I would.

 

Link

[James_OldeTowne]

In reality, the majority of 19th century silver would be pretty much black today if no dipping occurred, unless they were isolated from the atmosphere for decades to centuries.

I've seen similar comments posted before, and it just isn't true. 90% silver would not typically turn "black" even after 200 years of exposure to a normal environment. Now, .999 silver would, since that is almost pure and would be highly reactive, but .900 should not. It should, however, turn much darker than "blast-white".

 

I have just cataloged a collection with some coins that have been in storage in high sulphur content for almost 80 years (since the Great Depression), and even in that most uninviting environment, the coins are not black. But they are distinctively grey with varying shades of color, and have an unbelievably original patina that no words can describe.

[comicdonna]

No. You strip the coin, you strip the history, you strip my interest. Might as well be a modern day restrike...JMHO

This is my feeling as well. I will just have to learn the difference between original and the enhanced versions.

[michael]

In reality, the majority of 19th century silver would be pretty much black today if no dipping occurred, unless they were isolated from the atmosphere for decades to centuries.

I've seen similar comments posted before, and it just isn't true. 90% silver would not typically turn "black" even after 200 years of exposure to a normal environment. Now, .999 silver would, since that is almost pure and would be highly reactive, but .900 should not. It should, however, turn much darker than "blast-white".

 

I have just cataloged a collection with some coins that have been in storage in high sulphur content for almost 80 years (since the Great Depression), and even in that most uninviting environment, the coins are not black. But they are distinctively grey with varying shades of color, and have an unbelievably original patina that no words can describe.

 

well put (thumbs u (thumbs u

[Hard Times]

James,

The other metal that makes up the 10% in a silver coin is copper, which is even more chemically reactive. You need more that just sulphur when sitting in an album for 80 years to progress the toning to dark blackish. You need moisture and airflow, and heat helps. If you put a silver coin on a shelf open to the atmosphere for much less than 80 years, probably only a few years, it is going to go black or nearly so, .900 or .999 don't matter. The .100 copper in a .900 coin will tone to very dark brown. The combination will be very dark, I would call it black, but you can call it whatever.

When a coin sits in an album, especially in a relatively low humidity environment, possibly the album sits in a box or drawer in a cabinet, etc., the air is restricted, reaction is slower.

I would rather have a dipped coin retoned or blast white rather than something so dark. I also find the uniform grey toned silver pieces to not be eye as appealing. Just my personal taste. And again, no 150 year old piece has an original skin if is not very dark, unless it was isolated from the atmosphere for most of this time, and that really does mean most, like ≥90% of that time. Most, if not all, silver (sans Morgans which were isolated in bank vaults) that is not dark grey or darker, have been dipped, most likely even the 80 year isolated coins you are cataloging James. The dipping probably took place before that 80 years of isolation. And again, this is simply not just my view, but those of legends like Bowers.

I have also heard time and time again how 'red' untoned 19th century copper can be original. This is not possible, unless someone had them in a vacuum chamber all of that time. They have all been dipped.

So James I disagree with you on this one. You might inspire me to do some calculations or experiments to see how long it takes to tone silver in the atmosphere. I would have to loo at the kinetics involved. But there is enough empirical evidence out there to show that silver tones quick and goes dark very quick, even the 0.900 variety, unless isolated as noted above.

Here is an example of a 0.900 coin in its close to original skin:

 

 

1844-O half

 

 

It is an obviously special variety. I had a look at it at the lot viewing room at FUN. It was amazing to see the doubled date, but the coin is simply ugly (IMO), dark (the slab photos are more close to the truth than the lightened non-slab pics), almost black and I decided not to bid. That is what original silver of this age looks like. Anything lighter has been dipped or was isolated as described above. I am pretty darn sure the former is the usual case, not the latter. If others want dark coins like this in close to, or original skins, go for it, but I prefer something with what I feel is greater eye appeal. Just my taste..... Everyone has their own which is why we discuss in this thread.

[JJSingleton]

I agree with both James and Michael's view on business strikes.

 

I am all about historical significance and for me originality is a must to get the coin to link me to the past.

[Mark T]

Hard Times

 

I like that dime , I also like most dark toned coins .

If this is the coin I think it is then the Heritage photo did little to help sell this coin.

 

The Bust Half – dipped for sure – but it has some attractive peripheral toning, and it is a popular date so I am not surprised you paid over ask.

 

[Hard Times]

Hi Mark,

Thanks for your note above. No doubt you are looking at the right lot on Heritage. As with some of the others I have put up here, I had the opportunity to view this specimen in hand before bidding at the Houston Money Show in 2008. Like we have discussed, interpreting HA pics is always chancy and after a few 'surprises' for lots I have won, I now want to see in hand. This one in hand was way better than the pics. I can't imagine how many HA lots have been sold for less because of their rotten pics.....

 

A word of caution here about the term 'originality' for old silver coins. Unless a coin is isolated from the atmosphere, it will tone to black pdq - black is the end result of Ag and Cu suflide production on the surfaces (White, 2004). And that toning crust is only some 10's of nanometers (10^-12m) thick! (1 mm = 10^-3 m). But that is why in many cases, a coin can be dipped, retoned, dipped, retoned, etc. and still have its mint bloom today - the toning is only 'skin deep'

 

Just to point out how quickly those silver coins will tone, Weimar White (2004) ran an experiment where he left 92.5% Ag, 7.5% Cu spoons on his kitchen top, and put some others in a closed container next to the ones on the top. In about 1 year, the exposed silverware was 'tarnished to a gun metal blue', while the ones not exposed to atmosphere were still 'brilliant!'. This experiment shows that most 150 year old coins probably were dipped and then retoned, possibly many times over and over, again that is the consensus among so-called experts. So the odds are very much against a 150 year old silver coin with nice toning is completely 'original' and never been 'conserved'..... That even goes for an old coin that sat isolated from the atmosphere for 80 years as there was ample time prior to this to tone to the point where it needed conservation.

 

I am not sure that the argument that a lovely darker toned coin is more original, and hence has more history, than a blast-white one, both of which were likely to have been properly conserved throughout their histories, is relevant...... I will prefer the coin with the most eye appeal, blast white or dark with mint bloom still there, to an over-dipped blast white or dark coin where the mint bloom has been washed (literally) away.

[coinman1794]

I have so often explained to folks that (ignoring Morgan dollars) few things in numismatics look dumber than a blast-white coin from the 19th century. Of course, we all know there are exceptions, and for one reason or another, a few stragglers survived blast white, but one would think from the amount of blast-white material in slabs that it was the rule, rather than the exception.

 

What I hate most of all is blast-white capped-bust coins. I can't stand them, because those were NEVER saved in rolls, and there's just simply no excuse for such a coin to survive without toning except in the most extreme circumstances.

 

EDITED to add:

 

No kidding, I believe EVERY blast-white BU capped-bust coin should automatically be relegated to a "details only" problem holder with "cleaned" as the disclaimer.

 

What about the ones that were cleaned using safe techniques that did no damage to the coin, and merely removed build up that was hidding the original white surfaces underneath? Often residues can protect the original white metal for centuries. White does not automatically mean dipped in acid.

[TomB]

No.

[jgrinz]

No.

 

hahah Had to laugh .. Good ol' TomB Short and Sweet )

[Revenant]

I like White and Shiny with Morgans and anything newer than that. But with anything more than 60-70 years old, I'm going to want to see at least some surface layer of grit or grime that lets you believe that the thing has been around a while.

 

Any white coins also need to have great luster. There's something intrinsically terrible about a flat white with no sparkle (and yes, a lower grade is much better than that).

[comicdonna]

So, I was interested in this coin on ebay. Does anyone think there's a chance that the coin has been dipped?

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Mike

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=370374284183&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT

[michael]

mike great question and example by the way!!

 

the coin has definately been dipped and also based on the photos i think over dipped

 

it is a definate pass coin for me.........sorry

 

i dont like dipped white morgan dollars

 

now yes white morgan dollars like in gsa holders that are white with no toning and have an original fresh skin from being in a bag this is okie and i love this look

 

also you can tell a roll fresh totally white never dipped white morgan from a dipped white morgan if you know what to look for

 

 

[michael]

to sum it up i DONT LIKE ANY DIPPED OUT BLAST WHITE MORGAN DOLLARS BUSINESS STRIKE OR PROOF

 

now an original thick skinned totally white tone free morgan out of an original bag or an original roll fresh coin i like these coins and they are not rare nor are they super common sort of in between and closer to comman than rare

[comicdonna]

mike

 

the coin has definately been dipped and also based on the photos i think over dipped

 

it is a definate pass coin for me

 

i dont like dipped white morgan dollars

 

now yes white morgan dollars like in gsa holders that are white with no toning and have an original fresh skin from being in a bag this is okie and i love this look

 

also you can tell a roll fresh totally white never dipped white morgan from a dipped white morgan if you know what to look for

 

Thanks Michael! Luckily, I did pass on the coin and purchased a different Morgan instead. I do need to learn how to tell if a coin has been dipped or not.