I processed TEN copper coins with MS-70 last night - SEE THE RESULTS!

[MAULEMALL]

wow, Ive been across the street for way to long

 

Well it seems that the only reason some people come from across the street these days is to throw accusations and insinuations to people on this board.While leaving those across the street completely alone to continue to dip and doctor (as they say).

 

Personally I think they need to grow up.

That being said,Welcome back

[James_OldeTowne]

Now that we've gotten a few additional comments here and across the street, I'll chime in a couple of thoughts.

 

I have heard MS-70 advertised - not as a "coin doctoring" product, but as a conservation product. My experiment verifies that it has legitimate and useful application in removing ugly and potentially damaging spots, including active green verdigris, from the surface of a copper coin. In this regard, we must admit that MS-70 may have a proper place in the legitimate practice of conserving and saving collectable coins.

 

This experiment only involved ten coins, and I've only ever used MS-70 two other times, so my experience has a grand total of twelve applications. There's not enough data here for me to be able to predict which coins will turn "ugly" tan, which will turn "pretty" blue, and which will turn "purple". Therefore, if I wanted to doctor coins, I would be taking a huge risk using MS-70, which might give me the wrong result.

 

However, someone with years of experience, or someone who made a formal and concerted effort to learn how and when to use the product might be able to consistently produce the blue coins.

 

I also won't take sides on any philosophical argument as to whether creating blue coins is good or bad, ethical or not. There is not the slightest doubt that some of the coins above were improved by the application of MS-70, and I can't argue with someone whose intent is to use it for that purpose. If the goal is to create blue coins, I, being merely a low-budget and relatively obscure and unimportant member of the coin market, don't feel I have the right to stop someone from having their blue coins.

 

Personally, I choose not to collect "blue IHCs", but I respect the rights of others to do so.

 

One final thought from me: the blue color on these coins is distinctly different from the truly original bluish tint that can and does develop on some copper naturally. My favorite coin in my entire collection, which I have displayed here on the boards on occasion, is an 1837 large-cent in lustrous UNC, and it displays a subtle bluish tint, but that coin is exactly as I bought it, and I've owned it for quite a few years. I've never seen an artificially "blued" coin that has the same wholesome beauty of that one.

 

I appreciate the excellent conversation and exchange of ideas that this thread has prompted.

 

James

[Stanley]

Posting for educational purposes

James, approximately 2 years ago I found a 1968 S cent piece in a mint set which I had for a while. Upon examining it I noticed doubling on the obverse. Well, at the time I new very little about doubling and in fact I was excited and thought I had found something special and thought I would have it graded. In addition I knew very little about any coin other than the fact that I liked them.

The cent had a small spot on the obverse, very small, maybe the size of a mustard seed and it was brown/ black. So I did a series of things to remove it.

 

I put Vaseline on it and let it set for a day then washed it with alcohol. Never at any point did I rub this cent. No change.

 

I soaked it for a day in an electrical contact cleaner which is safe for copper. No change

 

I soaked it in WD 40 maybe 6 hours. Little change.

 

I soaked it in PB Blaster ( a product similar to WD 40 only more potent). Little change

 

I soaked it in Lacquer Thinner Reducer, Little change.

 

I soaked it in Charcoal lighter fluid, Little change

 

After about a week of “ do it yourself conservation” I began to notice the cent surface seemed to be getting tender.

 

Because I didn’t rub or wipe the surface I needed something to clear the wet material after each application. I was using compressed air out of a portable air tank with a small air nozzle. Toward the end of my “conservation efforts” I started to notice that while I was blowing the material off the surface the copper would start flashing purple, blue, red the exact tones that I have been seeing lately. I noticed when I would stop blowing the copper color would flash back to normal. I became concerned that I was going to ruin this coin so I stopped blowing and laid the coin out to dry.

 

I also need to mention that in between some of these applications I would soak the cent in Mineral oil.

 

In conclusion I determined from my experience that the solvents were weakening the composition of the copper making the surface unstable.

The constant flow of air pressure flowing over the unstable (tender) copper was causing it to flash to what I thought were undesirable colors.

 

In addition I believe had I continued this coin would have changed to unnatural

colors.

 

This also proves to some degree that constant air flow over a compromised weakened surface can change the appearance of copper.

 

Coin is graded MS 66 RD

[IrishMike]

This lincoln had been laquered and was dipped yesterday in two different products, neither of which is a coin related product.

[MarkFeld]

Posted by Sunnywood "across the street"

 

"I posted a reply to this thread last night which seems to have disappeared, or perhaps there was a glitch in the upload. I will try again, although I'm sure I won't be as thorough on this second attempt.

 

Treatments that merely remove adherent contaminants such as dirt, dust, debris, oil, PVC, or films of foreign substances without altering the underlying metallic surfaces of the coin are not doctoring. This category of treatments typically includes solvent dipping (such as acetone or isopropanol), and mild ultrasonic cleaning in an aqueous solution that does NOT contain reactive agents. Non-reactive agents include simple pH-neutral detergents and surfactants.

 

Any treatment that mechanically alters the surfaces (whizzing, brushing, abrading, polishing, electropolishing, lasering), or that alters the surface chemistry (deliberate removal or creation of oxides or sulfides by thermal and/or chemical processes) is DOCTORING.

 

Contrary to what has been stated in a previous thread on these boards, MS70 is NOT a harmless (i.e. non-reactive) detergent. A simple pH analysis shows it to be strongly caustic (alkaline). Further analysis indicates that in addition to any detergent or surfactant present in MS70, IMHO there is a presence of sodium hydroxide (caustic soda, the active ingredient in lye). Copper is fairly reactive with most acidic and alkaline agents. The sodium hydroxide that I believe to be present in MS70 will have a color-changing and surface-altering effect on copper.

 

Similarly, another household product that contains an alkaline hydroxide compound is well known to have color-changing effects on copper: namely, household "ammonia" (actually that is a misnomer; the common household product is not true ammonia, but rather an aqueous solution of ammonium hydroxide).

 

The use of MS70 or ammonia on copper falls squarely into the category of DOCTORING, as these hydroxide compounds are reactive with copper, and have an effect on surface chemistry and color. The effects are heightened at elevated temperatures.

 

The mere removal of a shellac film with an otherwise non-reactive agent such as acetone is not doctoring in my opinion. However, the recent surge of blue and other toned copper does not have its origin in the removal of old shellac coatings ... rather, it is being created by DOCTORING, including the use of ammonium and sodium hydroxides, and thermal treatments."

[John Martinez]

I Googled MS 70 and found the following:

MS70 Industrial Strength Coin Brightener, according to the manufacturer, is safe to use on Gold, Silver, Nickel, Copper, Bronze and Brass. It contains no acid.

 

MS70 does not change the color of your coin, but does remove surface contamination and tarnish. MS70 will allow the natural beauty of the original surface to show as a bright as the day your coin left the mint.

 

MS70 was designed to be used on mint state or proof coins but does wonders on AU or slightly used coins restoring the brilliant surfaces that remain under tarnish and years of surface contamination that has accumulated on your coins. Surface contamination is PVC, tarnish, fog, oil, dirt, etc.

 

The name, in my opinion, leads one to believe that you can make an MS 70 coin out of a lesser grade. If not, then why not name it MS 69, of EF 40?.

 

It is named a "Coin Brightener" - Big Bold Letters on the bottle, yet states "does not change the color of your coin" and "does wonders on AU or slightly used coins restoring the brilliant surfaces..."

 

Again, rekindling my love for this hobby recently, the first I heard of this product were posts here. I was always told "don't clean the coin". I have my Linc set from a kid, where I did not know better, scotch taped them in the folder. I recently transfered them, but left the gunk on them because I constantly hear "what every you do don't try to clean them".

 

Before I even started reading more about this product, after hearing the name MS 70 here, my first thoughts were "why do you think they call it MS 70 anyway?". Companies pay market people big bucks to name a product. Why? To impart a thought into the consumer of what the product is just by it's name.

 

Who am I to say what is acceptable and not in coin conservation? No one. Not enough experience to even comment. I can; however, give you my impressions from a newbe standpoint and that is, if the intent of the product is not to change the appearance of the coin for the purpose of getting a higher grade from the TPG, then why call it "MS 70 Coin Brightener"? "The Emperor has no clothes".

[truthteller]

Posted by Sunnywood "across the street"

 

"I posted a reply to this thread last night which seems to have disappeared, or perhaps there was a glitch in the upload. I will try again, although I'm sure I won't be as thorough on this second attempt.

 

Treatments that merely remove adherent contaminants such as dirt, dust, debris, oil, PVC, or films of foreign substances without altering the underlying metallic surfaces of the coin are not doctoring. This category of treatments typically includes solvent dipping (such as acetone or isopropanol), and mild ultrasonic cleaning in an aqueous solution that does NOT contain reactive agents. Non-reactive agents include simple pH-neutral detergents and surfactants.

 

Any treatment that mechanically alters the surfaces (whizzing, brushing, abrading, polishing, electropolishing, lasering), or that alters the surface chemistry (deliberate removal or creation of oxides or sulfides by thermal and/or chemical processes) is DOCTORING.

 

Contrary to what has been stated in a previous thread on these boards, MS70 is NOT a harmless (i.e. non-reactive) detergent. A simple pH analysis shows it to be strongly caustic (alkaline). Further analysis indicates that in addition to any detergent or surfactant present in MS70, IMHO there is a presence of sodium hydroxide (caustic soda, the active ingredient in lye). Copper is fairly reactive with most acidic and alkaline agents. The sodium hydroxide that I believe to be present in MS70 will have a color-changing and surface-altering effect on copper.

 

Similarly, another household product that contains an alkaline hydroxide compound is well known to have color-changing effects on copper: namely, household "ammonia" (actually that is a misnomer; the common household product is not true ammonia, but rather an aqueous solution of ammonium hydroxide).

 

The use of MS70 or ammonia on copper falls squarely into the category of DOCTORING, as these hydroxide compounds are reactive with copper, and have an effect on surface chemistry and color. The effects are heightened at elevated temperatures.

 

The mere removal of a shellac film with an otherwise non-reactive agent such as acetone is not doctoring in my opinion. However, the recent surge of blue and other toned copper does not have its origin in the removal of old shellac coatings ... rather, it is being created by DOCTORING, including the use of ammonium and sodium hydroxides, and thermal treatments."

 

 

Well, I guess this is the final word. MS70 on copper is coin doctoring.

 

 

TRUTH

[MAULEMALL]

Posted by Sunnywood "across the street"

 

"I posted a reply to this thread last night which seems to have disappeared, or perhaps there was a glitch in the upload. I will try again, although I'm sure I won't be as thorough on this second attempt.

 

Treatments that merely remove adherent contaminants such as dirt, dust, debris, oil, PVC, or films of foreign substances without altering the underlying metallic surfaces of the coin are not doctoring. This category of treatments typically includes solvent dipping (such as acetone or isopropanol), and mild ultrasonic cleaning in an aqueous solution that does NOT contain reactive agents. Non-reactive agents include simple pH-neutral detergents and surfactants.

 

Any treatment that mechanically alters the surfaces (whizzing, brushing, abrading, polishing, electropolishing, lasering), or that alters the surface chemistry (deliberate removal or creation of oxides or sulfides by thermal and/or chemical processes) is DOCTORING.

 

Contrary to what has been stated in a previous thread on these boards, MS70 is NOT a harmless (i.e. non-reactive) detergent. A simple pH analysis shows it to be strongly caustic (alkaline). Further analysis indicates that in addition to any detergent or surfactant present in MS70, IMHO there is a presence of sodium hydroxide (caustic soda, the active ingredient in lye). Copper is fairly reactive with most acidic and alkaline agents. The sodium hydroxide that I believe to be present in MS70 will have a color-changing and surface-altering effect on copper.

 

Similarly, another household product that contains an alkaline hydroxide compound is well known to have color-changing effects on copper: namely, household "ammonia" (actually that is a misnomer; the common household product is not true ammonia, but rather an aqueous solution of ammonium hydroxide).

 

The use of MS70 or ammonia on copper falls squarely into the category of DOCTORING, as these hydroxide compounds are reactive with copper, and have an effect on surface chemistry and color. The effects are heightened at elevated temperatures.

 

The mere removal of a shellac film with an otherwise non-reactive agent such as acetone is not doctoring in my opinion. However, the recent surge of blue and other toned copper does not have its origin in the removal of old shellac coatings ... rather, it is being created by DOCTORING, including the use of ammonium and sodium hydroxides, and thermal treatments."

 

 

Well, I guess this is the final word. MS70 on copper is coin doctoring.

 

 

TRUTH

Why?

 

Edited to ask Truth to look at my post on the 21 morgan and give his Opinion as to wether i can help the coin.

[EZ_E]

One final thought from me: the blue color on these coins is distinctly different from the truly original bluish tint that can and does develop on some copper naturally. My favorite coin in my entire collection, which I have displayed here on the boards on occasion, is an 1837 large-cent in lustrous UNC, and it displays a subtle bluish tint, but that coin is exactly as I bought it, and I've owned it for quite a few years. I've never seen an artificially "blued" coin that has the same wholesome beauty of that one.

 

The old-time collectors used to use cyanide to clean their copper which left such a bluish tint.

 

I feel that as long as a coin retains its eye-appeal and is not hairlined or otherwise damaged that it is an acceptable practice.

 

p.s. I don't think that the eye-appeal was enhanced on ANY of James' test coins. They were actually turned from nice, original coins into turdskies.

[Beijim]

A very interesting experiment - thank you for taking the time to perform, document, and submit it here.

 

And incidentally, don't forget to get #s 5, 8, and 10 slabbed and listed on eBay. I'm certain someone will be happy to pay $400-600 apiece for them...

 

Beijim

[Hoot]

Alkaline chemicals can be used to successfully remove verdigris from copper. This has been known for a very long time. They can also remove fresh fingerprints, which contain amino acids that will eventually etch a coin. Reactive processes with the elemental form of the metal on the surface of the coin is a matter of the application of any non-pH-neutral reactants. When used with proper discretion, a coin can be improved. Removal of verdigris, for example, must also be followed by complete removal of the basic reactant. Reactants require removal by specific solutes, and when done properly will not leave a residue to change the elemental appearance of the coin. A coin can change appearance by reactive residues that are left behind (and their subsequent legacy of reactions), by changes in the microstructure of the surfaces of the coins, and by subsequent reactions of elements in the coins that will occur due to the environment in which the coin is left, which in most households is a real alphabet soup. I will never consider proper conservation "coin doctoring" and therefor cannot agree with Sunnywood, whom I have tremendous respect for. What is done subsequent to conservation, even the seemingly innocent act of leaving the coin on your velvet tray, will change the coin forever. So, learn some chemistry and apply proper techniques when implementing it. Let no one be surprised but yourself.

 

As an aside, MS70 is little more than a small "mystery in a bottle" since I can't even find an MSDS sheet on it. I'm sure that a person with access to a basic college laboratory could figure it out. It is likely not sodium hydroxide (since I've worked with that to remove verdigris with fairly differrent results from MS70), although there would appear to be a hydroxy component. Personally, I've guessed that it's potassium hydroxide, but whatever the anion, there is some potential for subsequent reaction on a coin's surface if left behind. The reaction is likely one of the anion with cations in the air or in the impure water, etc., that was used to rinse the coin, not with the metal itself. Subsequent reactions with the metals (and there are many) in the the coin would be complicated by the salts and other complexes that form on the coin's surface, as well as the environment to which it is subjected.

 

My 1/2 cents worth.

 

Hoot Bye!

[truthteller]

Alkaline chemicals can be used to successfully remove verdigris from copper. This has been known for a very long time. They can also remove fresh fingerprints, which contain amino acids that will eventually etch a coin. Reactive processes with the elemental form of the metal on the surface of the coin is a matter of the application of any non-pH-neutral reactants. When used with proper discretion, a coin can be improved. Removal of verdigris, for example, must also be followed by complete removal of the basic reactant. Reactants require removal by specific solutes, and when done properly will not leave a residue to change the elemental appearance of the coin. A coin can change appearance by reactive residues that are left behind (and their subsequent legacy of reactions), by changes in the microstructure of the surfaces of the coins, and by subsequent reactions of elements in the coins that will occur due to the environment in which the coin is left, which in most households is a real alphabet soup. I will never consider proper conservation "coin doctoring" and therefor cannot agree with Sunnywood, whom I have tremendous respect for. What is done subsequent to conservation, even the seemingly innocent act of leaving the coin on your velvet tray, will change the coin forever. So, learn some chemistry and apply proper techniques when implementing it. Let no one be surprised but yourself.

 

As an aside, MS70 is little more than a small "mystery in a bottle" since I can't even find an MSDS sheet on it. I'm sure that a person with access to a basic college laboratory could figure it out. It is likely not sodium hydroxide (since I've worked with that to remove verdigris with fairly differrent results from MS70), although there would appear to be a hydroxy component. Personally, I've guessed that it's potassium hydroxide, but whatever the anion, there is some potential for subsequent reaction on a coin's surface if left behind. The reaction is likely one of the anion with cations in the air or in the impure water, etc., that was used to rinse the coin, not with the metal itself. Subsequent reactions with the metals (and there are many) in the the coin would be complicated by the salts and other complexes that form on the coin's surface, as well as the environment to which it is subjected.

 

My 1/2 cents worth.

 

Hoot Bye!

 

 

 

Well, I guess this is the final word. MS70 on copper is coin doctoring.

 

 

 

TRUTH

[James_OldeTowne]

 

... by request.

[relicsncoins]

I would like to see someone submitt the original coin for grading, then crack it out and treat it, and see what the results are.

 

JJ

[ldhair]

I lost track of all of this.

Is TRUTH still here?

 

[MAULEMALL]

I lost track of all of this.

Is TRUTH still here?

Yes truth is still here...He got one of my posts in the water cooler pulled when he took it political day before yesterday.

[James_OldeTowne]

Should this be changed or redone as a WYNTK thread? Is there some way we can ALL come to an agreement to try not to wreck it if done in as an objective a manner as I can?

 

For that matter, is the initial discussion objective enough to be useful?

 

[stev32k]

For what it is worth I am a chemist and chemical engineer and have done the process design for soap production in the past. I have not done a chemical analysis of MS70, but I did check the pH of a 1% solution and it is 10.6. It is also low foaming (non-persistent foam) when mixed with water. From the odor I can tell they are adding perfume - the same used in some bleach and soap products.

 

My best guess (and only a guess) is that MS70 is nothing more waste cooking grease mixed with either sodium, potassium, or calcium hydroxide. I bet on the sodium hydroxide because it is cheaper. It is then brought to a boil, filtered, diluted, add the perfume and then bottle the product.

 

Making soap from animal fat and lye (calcium hydroxide) has been around for several hundred years. It's the least expensive and best known soap making process around. The problem is that it is too strong for normal use around the house - hence the industrial strength designation.

 

I have a suspicion that the MS70 "factory" is someone's garage or patio, and they make the batches up in 55 gallon drums.

 

 

 

 

[MAULEMALL]

Should this be changed or redone as a WYNTK thread? Is there some way we can ALL come to an agreement to try not to wreck it if done in as an objective a manner as I can?

 

For that matter, is the initial discussion objective enough to be useful?

 

I have noproblem with it James but I still think that any personal thoughts(animosities, agendas) need to be out of any posts either now or future..

[MAULEMALL]

For what it is worth I am a chemist and chemical engineer and have done the process design for soap production in the past. I have not done a chemical analysis of MS70, but I did check the pH of a 1% solution and it is 10.6. It is also low foaming (non-persistent foam) when mixed with water. From the odor I can tell they are adding perfume - the same used in some bleach and soap products.

 

My best guess (and only a guess) is that MS70 is nothing more waste cooking grease mixed with either sodium, potassium, or calcium hydroxide. I bet on the sodium hydroxide because it is cheaper. It is then brought to a boil, filtered, diluted, add the perfume and then bottle the product.

 

Making soap from animal fat and lye (calcium hydroxide) has been around for several hundred years. It's the least expensive and best known soap making process around. The problem is that it is too strong for normal use around the house - hence the industrial strength designation.

 

I have a suspicion that the MS70 "factory" is someone's garage or patio, and they make the batches up in 55 gallon drums.

 

 

 

Some of the more high dollar soaps are made in garages..

 

But since you have access to a lab can you do any lab analysis to get actual data..

[DJCoinz]

Thanks for the bump...very interesting results.

[Newmismatist]

The old-time collectors used to use cyanide to clean their copper which left such a bluish tint.

 

I have read that cyanide used on copper results in a very red (and sometime "dead") result. I don't think you get blue from cyanide

 

I think a guy named "Saltus" died from Cyanide when he drank the cyanide solution instead of his ginger ale - he was cleaning copper coins - so that method of cleaning copper has a significant downside.

 

As for James' experiment - it is clearly what's ON the copper that reacts with the MS70, NOT the copper - same result I got when I tried it a year ago - I could NOT get any red copper coin to turn blue using MS 70 - I even boiled the copper in the MS70 - got some very bright coins, but no blue - so it's NOT the copper - it must be the copper salts/oxides on the coin that react with the product - a chemist will ave to explain it for us - but untoned (ie RED) copper does NOT turn blue by using MS 70.

[Swampboy]

Very informative.

 

Thanks for the original post and the bump James.

[MikeInFL]

I'm no chemist, but perhaps that the copper-oxide later (i.e. crust) reacts with the MS-70 (perhaps turning copper-oxide to copper-sulfide, which can be blue)?

 

Thoughts?

[michael]

Interesting experiment James. It makes me suspect of any copper coin that features blue or purple. Not that a person cannot collect those if they like but I'm starting to believe they are the product of doctoring or AT.

 

(thumbs u (thumbs u (thumbs u (thumbs u (thumbs u

[stev32k]

But since you have access to a lab can you do any lab analysis to get actual data..

 

No, the lab I have access to does not have that capability.

[texasrichard]

But since you have access to a lab can you do any lab analysis to get actual data..

 

No, the lab I have access to does not have that capability.

 

 

I think I've for the most part avoided "these" threads. I don't own and never even seen a bottle of MS70 in person. That said though I wouldn't be so quick to discount what stev32k stated.

 

As a 20+ year veteran of commercial laundries and having direct daily contact with chemicals used for such I believe I can speak with some authority on the chemicals used in commercial laundry processing. No... we don't use giant boxes of "Tide". Stev32k is 100% correct when he mentioned animal fat as a component of soap (historically speaking). True "Soap" is a natural surfactant that is produced by mixing animal fats (tallow) or vegetable fats with caustic soda or caustic potash. The use of "tallow soap" has a history of over 2000 years. It wasn't until about the end of WWII that synthetic anionic surfactants came into general use.

 

When looking at cleaning agents one needs to understand the role and function of the various chemicals. The names, uses and properties of these chemicals seem to be thrown around these threads without much regard for fact.

 

Surfactants:

Actually "detergents" are a subclass of chemical compounds known as "surfactants. All detergents are surfactants, but not all surfactants are detergents. The role of a surfactant primarliy is to suspend soil, although it also plays a role in loosening soil. Surfactants are classified based on how they ionize in solution. They are "cationic", "anionic" or "nonionic". For example cationic surfactants are usually ammonia derivatives.

 

Sodium Hydroxide:

Sodium Hydroxide is an alkali. It is added to surfactants to assit in soil removal. In the commercial laundry world it is the single highest used component chemical that we purchase. We buy it 4000 gallons at a shot for example.

The "slickness" that was mentioned about the MS70 definately comes from some sort of alkali in the product. Alkali's always will feel "slick" whereas acids will not. Just FYI... sodium hydroxide is commonly referred to as "caustic soda".

 

I'm not sure why I wrote all this out other than to help others understand what types of chemistry might be involved. If a 1% solution of MS70 has a 10.5pH or whatever that someone said; you can be positive that it is a highly alkaline substance.. therefore the slickness.

 

Anyway... it's sad that coins get messed with in the first place. Even worse if done to deceive and gain a profit.

 

I'll crawl back into my foxhole now...

 

 

[MAULEMALL]

But since you have access to a lab can you do any lab analysis to get actual data..

 

No, the lab I have access to does not have that capability.

 

 

I think I've for the most part avoided "these" threads. I don't own and never even seen a bottle of MS70 in person. That said though I wouldn't be so quick to discount what stev32k stated.

 

As a 20+ year veteran of commercial laundries and having direct daily contact with chemicals used for such I believe I can speak with some authority on the chemicals used in commercial laundry processing. No... we don't use giant boxes of "Tide". Stev32k is 100% correct when he mentioned animal fat as a component of soap (historically speaking). True "Soap" is a natural surfactant that is produced by mixing animal fats (tallow) or vegetable fats with caustic soda or caustic potash. The use of "tallow soap" has a history of over 2000 years. It wasn't until about the end of WWII that synthetic anionic surfactants came into general use.

 

When looking at cleaning agents one needs to understand the role and function of the various chemicals. The names, uses and properties of these chemicals seem to be thrown around these threads without much regard for fact.

 

Surfactants:

Actually "detergents" are a subclass of chemical compounds known as "surfactants. All detergents are surfactants, but not all surfactants are detergents. The role of a surfactant primarliy is to suspend soil, although it also plays a role in loosening soil. Surfactants are classified based on how they ionize in solution. They are "cationic", "anionic" or "nonionic". For example cationic surfactants are usually ammonia derivatives.

 

Sodium Hydroxide:

Sodium Hydroxide is an alkali. It is added to surfactants to assit in soil removal. In the commercial laundry world it is the single highest used component chemical that we purchase. We buy it 4000 gallons at a shot for example.

The "slickness" that was mentioned about the MS70 definately comes from some sort of alkali in the product. Alkali's always will feel "slick" whereas acids will not. Just FYI... sodium hydroxide is commonly referred to as "caustic soda".

 

I'm not sure why I wrote all this out other than to help others understand what types of chemistry might be involved. If a 1% solution of MS70 has a 10.5pH or whatever that someone said; you can be positive that it is a highly alkaline substance.. therefore the slickness.

 

Anyway... it's sad that coins get messed with in the first place. Even worse if done to deceive and gain a profit.

 

I'll crawl back into my foxhole now...

 

No one is dicounting Anything that was said.. I believe that there are some Really bright people on this board and alot of them are in the sciences..

I Was asking if there was any way to get any hard and definitive data..

 

 

 

AND Don't go back into the hole.. We may have more to learn from you.

[RGT]

I read this when James first posted it, but when reading it again I noticed something that I hadn't noticed before. As someone mentioned, MS70 doesn't seem to affect red copper so it appears as though whatever reaction is occuring is only happening with the brown copper compound or oxidized copper. What really jumped out at me this time though was that the only coins in James experiment that appear to have turned any significant shade of blue or purple were Lincoln cents. The darkside coins got lighter and cleaner, but didn't turn blue.

 

I'm sure someone can post some blue darkside coppers that have resulted from MS70 treatment, but I found it interesting that none of them did in this small group.