| Author |
Message |
slikrepMember
Posts: 43
Joined: 12 Dec 2006
|
|
 Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 8:50 pm |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 StevenExpert Member
Posts: 1298
Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Location: S/E Missouri
|
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 8:58 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 eagamesExpert Member
Posts: 3013
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
|
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 9:02 pm |
|
|
It's probably a normal cent but somebody used acid to etch it to be thin. Does it look a bit like orange peel on the surface?
On some I found they somehow shaved the rims, they get it exactly dime sized. Mostly it was done on older ones when a dime was worth something so they could buy a candy bar.
The reason they did it was so they could spend it in a vending machine.
_________________
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
|
StevenExpert Member
Posts: 1298
Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Location: S/E Missouri
|
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 9:03 pm |
|
|
To quote coop,
| Quote: |
It is acid dipped. Sulfric Acid. I've covered that subject on me ME page on Ebay.
http://members.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewUserPage&userid=coop49
It was used in 50,60's to reduce the Cent size down to the size of a dime and then used to purchase a soda from the vending machines. The rim is thinner, but the detail remains as it is pressed during the mint process, thus making it harder to disolve. Most were made in chemistry class to watch the fizz. Wait too long and nothing was hardly left.
|
Steven
|
|
|
|
|
|
eagamesExpert Member
Posts: 3013
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
|
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 9:29 pm |
|
|
Steven,
That's great, I never saw Coops page before but it's full of good info for all and as always his photos are super 
Thanks for linking to it.
_________________
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
|
slikrepMember
Posts: 43
Joined: 12 Dec 2006
|
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 10:32 pm |
|
|
|
Thank you very much for the link. I can't tell you how nice it is to have a live data base such as yourselves to help me out. I really appreciate it. I've got some oddities I'll be posting in the next few days. Who knows? Maybe I'll get lucky. Thanks again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
