![]() | Message Board |
Posted by JeffK on August 19, 2010 at 19:54:29:
In Reply to: copper quarter posted by TOM HUDSON on August 18, 2010 at 10:22:06:
The fact that it's thinner than a regular quarter makes me suspect it's a lamination error. In the case of clad coins like post-1965 dimes, quarters, and halves it means one (or rarely) both cupronickel outer layers is missing and the coin's copper core is visible.
Lamination errors can happen in at least 3 ways:
> The outer layer didn't bond solidly to the core and came off, either before or after the coin was struck.
> The planchet was punched from the end of an incomplete roll of clad stock, where the outer cladding didn't extend over the core.
> The bond was weak and someone with tools and too much spare time managed to work off the outer layer.
I'm sure there's more, but after a long work day I'm kinda mushy and can't think of them :=)
Anyway, a clad quarter with a true lamination error (i.e. that occurred at the Mint) might go for $8 to $10, but you'd need to have it examined in person to evaluate what really happened to it.
:
: Jeff, I'm not sure if my first post went through, so here I go again (I got a message saying I did not fill in my name). I have a copper quarter (1980) that is less than half the thickness of a regular quarter. It is slightly bent because a lady was trying to put it in a vending machine. I'm in Mississippi. Any ideas to confirm what it is? Thanks, Tom