Wafer thin 1940 D Washington quarter.
0

41 posts in this topic

4,871 posts

I think it's possible that this slight loss of diameter is due to the deficiency of metal to fill the dies. It may have flowed up into the design instead of out into the reeded collar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,490 posts
I honestly don’t think the coin has been treated with acid it doesn’t have the typical surface conditions of a coin that has been treated with acid.

Actually it does. Lots of people think that soaking in acid will result in big pits in the coins and that isn't the normal case. Usually the coin will show a fine granularity over the entire surface as the acid attacks all of the surfaces relatively equally. (find a picture of a buffalo nickel that has had the date restored by soaking the entire coin in vinegar. You will see that granularity clearly.) This granularity can be seen on the edge pictures and in the protected areas on the reverse. (Blow up the reverse image and look at the tail area between the arrow shafts and the wreath. it shows in some of the other protected areas as well.) In this case it isn't showing all over because it appears the coin continued to circulate for awhile after the treatment.

Edited by Conder101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,958 posts

In the original statement, the OP stated that, "the diameter is the same as the normal quarter" and with the now provided diameter comparison, I may have to change my opinion.

 

Seeing that the diameter is in fact smaller than a fully struck quarter, there is no way reeds will strike up along the entire circumference of the wafer coin.

 

Even after this revelation, I'm still not 100% acid bath, but beginning to lean that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14,297 posts
In the original statement, the OP stated that, "the diameter is the same as the normal quarter" and with the now provided diameter comparison, I may have to change my opinion.

 

Seeing that the diameter is in fact smaller than a fully struck quarter, there is no way reeds will strike up along the entire circumference of the wafer coin.

 

Even after this revelation, I'm still not 100% acid bath, but beginning to lean that way.

 

The original picture posted sure led me to believe it was a lot smaller, and smaller still than the now provided comparison.

I am in the Michael School for now. Have seen this before. Also note MM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,308 posts
On 3/23/2013 at 8:37 PM, coinsandmedals said:

I’m not sure what to make of this quarter, its wafer thin and yet still has design details. I have placed another quarter of the same year in the pictures for comparison. The quarter in question is a 1941D, the coin is obviously much thinner than that of a normal quarter, the middle of the coin is just as thin as the rims, and the diameter is the same as the normal quarter. To me it looks like a well-worn normal quarter just based of the obverse and reverse, however the coin is too thin to just be simply worn. I would guess for the coin to be that thin from circulation the design on the obverse and reverse would have to be completely gone. Any suggestion as to what may have caused this, any help would be useful.

wafferthin25c003_zps82c336b6.jpg

wafferthin25c006_zps979748f9.jpg

wafferthin25c007_zps1dba09d0.jpg

wafferthin25c008_zpsc3fd7f28.jpg

So, now that you are back on the forum again,  Don:  did you ever find the answer to this question?

Edited by Just Bob
Typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
591 posts
29 minutes ago, Just Bob said:

So, now that you are back on the forum again,  Don:  did you ever find the answer to this quearion?

Wow I completely forgot about this. Thank you for bringing it back up. I’ll try to dig through some of that stuff and see if I still have it. I went on a selling frenzy before my first trip to the UK and I prioritized some of the more “liquid” items I had like proof WLHs and unc barber dimes. I doubt I ever got around to submitting it. That should be an exciting journey down memory lane. I’ll investigate and get post what I find! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
591 posts

Update: I looked everywhere I could think of and I have not found it. I did stumble upon some interesting odds and ends that I still have no idea what to do with. If I happen to stumble upon it I will post a picture. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,308 posts

For the record, I am in the Conder101/AegisIII camp. I think it was soaked in acid and then returned to circulation.

You should probably post pictures of your odds and ends, too.:nyah:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
591 posts
2 hours ago, Just Bob said:

For the record, I am in the Conder101/AegisIII camp. I think it was soaked in acid and then returned to circulation.

You should probably post pictures of your odds and ends, too.:nyah:

Well the odds and ends I found were old buttons, early military insignia, and just stuff. It’s the kind of stuff that accumulates in a box because it’s cool but you have absolutely no idea what to do with it. I’d be happy to start a new thread with a few pictures if there is interest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
512 posts
On 3/25/2013 at 8:37 PM, Conder101 said:

We'll wait for him to send it in, but I stand by my opinion. I have seen too many acid soaked coins.

I saw an example once many years ago and my mentor told me the same thing...it did resemble the OP's coin...so I'm in your camp...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
0