Look at this mercury dime

I dug this out of a trashy old house spot..

Hole was full of nails and cut brass pieces..

Saw a 79 glance up on one direction swing..so took a chance....some one was carving on it even looks like they were starting to cutting the letters out..

It's so thin it reads 5 points low..

1919 date..




Weird wonder what was on his mind..

Keith

“I don't care that they stole my idea . . I care that they don't have any of their own”
-Nikola Tesla



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/07/2017 08:36PM by Keith Southern.

That's some heavy wear. The early mercs have that wide rim wear. I would say that was dropped in the 1950's.

Any more wear it would be a slug. Sweet unmasking Keith.

Even battered and carved up, she's still a lovely lady. Way more attractive than FDR. He's been over 70 years in circulation and incredibly that's less than any other of our now circulating coinage.

"That's the way a lot of our OLD silver's come out...and the TID's can also be all over the shop! That's a GOOD example...most of the time our very worn silver's are just discs!"

Just think what it could buy in 1919.....indeed worn silver can cause havoc with ID units....more reason to dig the iffies.....

I'd say mid-1960's.

Let's say that dime circulated for 45 years. Has anyone found a clad 1965 dime in circulation that looks like that? 1965 + 45 = 2010.

You might be right reb, but you can't compare silver coins to clad. Silver is softer and wears much faster. Say what you want about clad coins, but they are practical because they are so durable. I believe Tom posted some time back a relatively short time for an uncirculated silver dime to go all the way down to very good. Twelve years sticks in my head as the period of time, but I might be off a little.

Hard to believe it wore that bad..

most of the other coins were close to same era dates in site...

and someone tried to cut the L out in liberty ...thin line goes all the way through right on lower leg of L..

Who Knows..

anyways was very very masked...Hard at times to believe what a Machine can report in such trash..

On the T2-C.I saw a flash of 79 on just the left sweep not the right sweep...

the right coil ( NEL SNAKE) and the right unit and sometimes you see some amazing things ..wish I had it on video...after I got it out of hole the targets in the hole were still reading 40s 50s and grunts of teens..I mean BAD...LOL

I'm used to plucking weird ghost hits out of iron but grabbing thin slivers of silver coins out of a trash pit of a site at a good 5 inches opens the eyes of just how far we've come in unmasking even in modern trash...

Keith

“I don't care that they stole my idea . . I care that they don't have any of their own”
-Nikola Tesla

Still an awesome recovery to say the least

Ole' Keith Southern is turning into a Coin Hunter!

LOL..Harold...

I'll take em when I dig em..

Keith

“I don't care that they stole my idea . . I care that they don't have any of their own”
-Nikola Tesla

I'll play the blues if you got the time,
And it won't cost you one "THIN DIME".

Now I know where that saying comes from......lol
Nice find!

Noah



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/08/2017 10:44PM by TabZilla.

Anybody have a reference for the hardness of US coins?

Did you have any specific choice of units - Brinell, Vickers , other?
As silver is sensitive to how it's worked and heat-treated, it's hard to pin down an accurate figure. The silver blanks may be medium hard, but the striking process will work-harden the surface layer (and reduce voids, cracks, change the shape of crystals,etc).
It looks like a figure of about 100 on the Vickers scale may be a good starting point for 90% U.S coin silver.

[riograndeblog.com]

The trouble is, this is measuring impact-resistance, which isn't necessarily comparable to abrasion-resistance.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/09/2017 01:57PM by Pimento.

Pimento Wrote:
"The silver blanks may be medium hard, but the striking process will work-harden the surface layer."

Which is why I believe the early mercs(Pre-1925) wear faster than later mercs. I feel the striking process was weaker in early mercs.

Beyonder-Pa Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Pimento Wrote:
> "The silver blanks may be medium hard, but the st
> riking process will work-harden the surface layer.
> "
>
> Which is why I believe the early mercs(Pre-1925) w
> ear faster than later mercs. I feel the striking p
> rocess was weaker in early mercs.


An interesting thought I never considered.

I just always assumed the additional time in circulation would be the reason for much more wear typically on the early mercs.

I've also wondered why circulated mercs often have that lovely gray patina, whereas silver rosies never do.

marcomo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Beyonder-Pa Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Pimento Wrote:
> > "The silver blanks may be medium hard, but the s
> t
> > riking process will work-harden the surface laye
> r.
> > "
> >
> > Which is why I believe the early mercs(Pre-1925)
> w
> > ear faster than later mercs. I feel the striking
> p
> > rocess was weaker in early mercs.
>
>
> An interesting thought I never considered.
>
> I just always assumed the additional time in circu
> lation would be the reason for much more wear typi
> cally on the early mercs.
>
> I've also wondered why circulated mercs often have
> that lovely gray patina, whereas silver rosies nev
> er do.

The gray to me means that the surface strike has worn away.

Quote
marcomo
I just always assumed the additional time in circulation would be the reason for much more wear typically on the early mercs.

Agree. Plus, a dime in 1919 circulated more often in a given month than a 1959 dime.

1919 nickels are often found in Fair/AG condition, often nearly dateless, yet circulated for no more than 50 years. A 1959 nickel circulated for 50 years in 2009. Ever see a well worn 1959 nickel? No. Yet both nickels have identical metallurgy and identical stamping processes.

go-rebels Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>

Quote
marcomo
I just always assumed the additio
> nal time in circulation would be the reason for mu
> ch more wear typically on the early mercs.

>
> Agree. Plus, a dime in 1919 circulated more often
> in a given month than a 1959 dime.
>
> 1919 nickels are often found in Fair/AG condition,
> often nearly dateless, yet circulated for no more
> than 50 years. A 1959 nickel circulated for 50 ye
> ars in 2009. Ever see a well worn 1959 nickel? N
> o. Yet both nickels have identical metallurgy and
> identical stamping processes.

Yes, and not just nearly dateless but often totally dateless. You would be hard pressed to find a Jeff without a date, but with Buffs...very common.

TabZilla Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'll play the blues if you got the time,
> And it won't cost you one "THIN DIME".
>
> Now I know where that saying comes from......lol
> Nice find!
>
> Noah


Actually the term "One Thin Dime" came about from the workhorse coinage of the US = Barber Coinage.

Barber coins were the most/longest used coins of all time in the US and to the point that the dimes would wear so thin that they were barely recognizable (hence) the term "one thin dime".

Maybe these types of slick coins were carried by someone for a long time. The obverse is black and slicker. I found the quarter in the pic just last month. The park I was hunting is new but it had fill dirt that came from who knows where. I have dug several really slick coins.

Yup, now Buffs suffered with the date being the highest feature on the obverse but still, the early Jeffs you see from 1939-41 never show a high degree of wear.