Name    : 
E-Mail  : 
Subject : 

Comments:
: : 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, THANKS FOR THE QUICK REPLY. I, LIKE OTHERS, HOPE FOR SOMETHING TO FALL IN MY HANDS THAT IS WORTH A LOT. IF IT IS WHAT YOU SAY, IT IS DEFINITELY BOTH SIDES. IT IS THINNER THAN A DIME, AND I'M SURE I COULD BEND IT IN HALF WITH ONE HAND. IT DOES STILL HAVE THE RIDGES AROUND THE EDGE ALSO.

: : : 
: : : 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



Optional Link URL:  
Link Title:         
Optional Image URL: