1939 Nickel 4.80 g ? 1 1

[J P M]

 I thought I would post this for Keith. I found this in a roll this morning and seeing I live in New England there could be some light weight nickels kicking around. It is not worn down enough in my opinion to be -20 g but ya never know.

[Mr.Bill347]

That’s really interesting JP, the nickel was so accurately made at 5g that;

All the nickels found in your change will be 5 grams. Because each modern nickel is exactly 5 grams, many people use nickels to calibrate their scales. You can place a nickel on your scale and then take note of the weight.

[Greenstang]

There is a mint tolerance of  +- .19 g on nickels so your nickel is underweight by .01g

[Oldhoopster]

On 11/7/2021 at 9:00 AM, Mr.Bill347 said:

That’s really interesting JP, the nickel was so accurately made at 5g that;

All the nickels found in your change will be 5 grams. Because each modern nickel is exactly 5 grams, many people use nickels to calibrate their scales. You can place a nickel on your scale and then take note of the weight.

Using a nickel for scale calibration isn't really a good idea because the actual spec range is 4.81 - 5.19 grams as noted by @Greenstang.  Most will be around 5.0 grams but not all.  You can always weigh a few nickels to see if your scale MIGHT be having a problem, but using it for calibration is sketchy at best.

It looks like you got that info from a website. I would be very cautious about using that site for information in the future

Edit to add:  I suppose the information you posted would be somewhat correct if your scale only had a 1 gram resolution (they said 5 grams, not 5.0 or 5.00).  But that type of scale would be useless for numismatics.

Edited November 7, 2021 by Oldhoopster

[Mr.Bill347]

Yes, I questioned that a little when is was looking for the acceptable tolerances tip for the nickel which is Tolerance on a nickel is +/- .19 grams (Cited from: https://www.cointalk.com/threads/1963-d-nickel-weighs-4-8-grams.281584/)

I agree oldhoopster, If it’s on the web,  isn’t it true? Lol

It looks like you got that info from a website. I would be very cautious about using that site for information in the future

Edit to add:  I suppose the information you posted would be somewhat correct if your scale only had a 1 gram resolution (they said 5 grams, not 5.0 or 5.00).  But that type of scale would be useless for numismatics.
 

I would add that the 2nd decimal is not important enough where a hundredth of a gram would make much difference to me, but with my collection one decimal place is fine. Can you give me an example where a hundredth of a gram made a significant difference?
according to my calculation, .01 grams of gold would be worth 15 cents, .09 would be $1.35, Just wanting to know. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.

Bill

Edited November 7, 2021 by Mr.Bill347
Edit

[GBrad]

On 11/7/2021 at 12:02 PM, Mr.Bill347 said:

I would add that the 2nd decimal is not important enough where a hundredth of a gram would make much difference to me, but with my collection one decimal place is fine.

I personally have a hundredths scale (.00) that I use.  It is just what I prefer now.  When I first started collecting I had a tenth scale (.0) that worked just fine for me.  I think what @Oldhoopster was inferring is that a single digit gram scale, without tenths or hundredths, is basically useless for a collector.  A case in point example is simply differentiating between a copper and a zinc Lincoln (if you can't just tell by looking at one).  A single digit gram scale will round up or down to the nearest whole number which is basically useless when it comes to telling what type of Lincoln you have due to the weight tolerances of these coins.  If this single digit scale's "brain" reads a zinc Cent to be 2.5 grams (even though it's still a single digit readout) it will round up to a reading of 3 grams on this type of scale.  The same holds true for a copper Cent that normally weighs 3.1 grams, it will round down to 3 grams.  This I believe is why a single digit reading gram scale is of no use.  I believe this would also hold true for other denominations of coins as well.  I think a tenths readout scale is perfectly fine for the most part.

Edited November 7, 2021 by GBrad

[GBrad]

On 11/7/2021 at 8:12 AM, J P Mashoke said:

 I thought I would post this for Keith. I found this in a roll this morning and seeing I live in New England there could be some light weight nickels kicking around. It is not worn down enough in my opinion to be -20 g but ya never know.

Now J P...... If that joker's weight was .6 grams heavier... and had a hole in the leg of the R in PLURIBUS...... you'd definitely have a keeper!!! (AKA: Henning )

Edited November 7, 2021 by GBrad

[Mr.Bill347]

There is a real reason that the 2nd decimal may be important. Best reason I’ve seen. Thank you

On 11/7/2021 at 12:51 PM, GBrad said:

I personally have a hundredths scale (.00) that I use.  It is just what I prefer now.  When I first started collecting I had a tenth scale (.0) that worked just fine for me.  I think what @Oldhoopster was inferring is that a single digit gram scale, without tenths or hundredths, is basically useless for a collector.  A case in point example is simply differentiating between a copper and a zinc Lincoln (if you can't just tell by looking at one).  A single digit gram scale will round up or down to the nearest whole number which is basically useless when it comes to telling what type of Lincoln you have due to the weight tolerances of these coins.  If this single digit scale's "brain" reads a zinc Cent to be 2.5 grams (even though it's still a single digit readout) it will round up to a reading of 3 grams on this type of scale.  The same holds true for a copper Cent that normally weighs 3.1 grams, it will round down to 3 grams.  This I believe is why a single digit reading gram scale is of no use.  I believe this would also hold true for other denominations of coins as well.  I think a tenths readout scale is perfectly fine for the most part.

 

[J P M]

On 11/7/2021 at 12:56 PM, GBrad said:

Now J P...... If that joker's weight was .6 grams heavier... and had a hole in the leg of the R in PLURIBUS...... you'd definitely have a keeper!!! (AKA: Henning )

Brad got what I was trying to point out that it is a 39 and Henning made 39 44 46 47 and 53 year Nickels and I was thinking they were they were underweight I saw somewhere they were some coins 4.86. I was bassackwards on my thinking but it was early this morning when I found it and I was not awake yet  Lol.  I know that Keith has been looking for one for a while now. Oh the scale is perfect well within a 0.01 it even has a 50g calibration weight it came with. I never heard of using a nickel to calibrate a scale that's new to me.  

Edited November 7, 2021 by J P Mashoke

[RWB]

A modern digital scale should measure to the ten-thousandth gram and display to the thousandth with repeatable results. However, most inexpensive scales the displaying to the thousandth only average the 3rd decimal so they are actually accurate to the hundredth of a gram, and that might not be repeatable. (Note -- at 0.0001 gram you have to use an air cover over the scale.)

[Keith Dee]

I’ve had nickels come up lighter then that. They where older ones like yours and I just pass it off as it wasn’t 5 grams when it was made and it lost weight due to wear. I’m interested in finding a Henning which is over 5. I believe 5.4 so anything under 5 serves no interest to me but thanks👍

[Keith Dee]

I went through my bag of 38 39’s for further inspection and got this that my scale shows at 4.75-4.76

[Keith Dee]

[Keith Dee]

I have like 5 38’s and 7 39’s. They all fall in around 4.8 to 5.0 except a couple 38’s are over like 5.05 and one 39 weighs 4.78 and this one keeps jumping between 4.75 and 4.76. I weighed them all three times and get the same results. Lighter ones I’m still chalking up as wear and nothing more.

[Keith Dee]

I’m wondering though if anyone knows more about the Henning story they can tell me about the nickels the feds recovered and reused the blanks from what I’ve read. Are they the same weight his nickels were or do you suppose they melted and repunched new ones from what they recovered?

[Mohawk]

Basically, the only thing I know about Henning nickels is that they exist and the 1944 lacks a mint mark.  However, I did a little search for you and found a pretty good article from Coin World from August of this year.  I don't know if you've seen it or not, Keith, but it may shed some light on some things for you:

https://coinweek.com/counterfeits/a-collectible-counterfeit-the-story-of-henning-nickels/

Error Ref also has this page:

http://www.error-ref.com/henning-counterfeit-nickel/

Edited November 8, 2021 by Mohawk

[GBrad]

On 11/7/2021 at 4:19 PM, RWB said:

A modern digital scale should measure to the ten-thousandth gram and display to the thousandth with repeatable results. However, most inexpensive scales the displaying to the thousandth only average the 3rd decimal so they are actually accurate to the hundredth of a gram, and that might not be repeatable. (Note -- at 0.0001 gram you have to use an air cover over the scale.)

Us mere mortals cannot afford a ten-thousandths scale..........  I am happy, and very pleased, with my extremely accurate hundredths scale.

[RWB]

On 11/7/2021 at 9:05 PM, Keith Dee said:

I’m wondering though if anyone knows more about the Henning story they can tell me about the nickels the feds recovered and reused the blanks from what I’ve read. Are they the same weight his nickels were or do you suppose they melted and repunched new ones from what they recovered?

The recovered counterfeits were destroyed. The metal included impurities not found in US nickels and it was sold as scrap. There is no evidence that the metal was reused at any US Mint and there is no reason for a mint to do so.

[Keith Dee]

On 11/8/2021 at 11:49 AM, RWB said:

The recovered counterfeits were destroyed. The metal included impurities not found in US nickels and it was sold as scrap. There is no evidence that the metal was reused at any US Mint and there is no reason for a mint to do so.

I just read that they recovered I believe 200,000 planchettes from a river and reused them. I don’t recall where I read it but if I find it I’ll post it. Not saying they’re correct just explaining why I said that. Plus he supposedly obtained his metal from the same place that provides or provided it to the mint that could be the wrong information but if it’s correct what impurities?

[Keith Dee]

Even the three articles I did come across they all say there’s dispute in the coin community about wether or not there’s a 6th coin or wether he did make his dies. I’m only assuming there is dispute amongst other details about this coin. Dead men tell no tells and old man Henning is long gone.

Edited November 8, 2021 by Keith Dee

[RWB]

On 11/8/2021 at 12:08 PM, Keith Dee said:

I just read that they recovered I believe 200,000 planchettes from a river and reused them. I don’t recall where I read it but if I find it I’ll post it. Not saying they’re correct just explaining why I said that. Plus he supposedly obtained his metal from the same place that provides or provided it to the mint that could be the wrong information but if it’s correct what impurities?

The Mints do not use scrap metal. Reuse water damaged planchets? Ridiculous.

Unless the place you read it has a US Mint or Secret Service report or letter as its source, it is mostly bovine excrement...with processed imitation cheese food on top.

[GBrad]

On 11/8/2021 at 12:12 PM, Keith Dee said:

Even the three articles I did come across they all say there’s dispute in the coin community about wether or not there’s a 6th coin or wether he did make his dies. I’m only assuming there is dispute amongst other details about this coin. Dead men tell no tells and old man Henning is long gone.

We shall never know about the proposed "6th" die......... all the more allure to the Henning story.  I just wonder one thing..... if he hadn't of screwed up by not including the P mm on the '44 Nickel, I wonder how long, or even if, he would have ever been caught???🤔 With the knowledge Henning had about the counterfeiting process, and being an engineer by trade, and then spending years in jail devising his next counterfeiting gig (after he was incarcerated the first time for counterfeiting) part of me cannot help but to think that Henning intentionally left off the P mm as sort of a "game" to him.  I think he was too smart for that (other than the fact he deposited his coins at his bank which was directly enroute between where he lived and worked.... not a smart move there but, maybe part of his M.O.)