Dipping Coins

I went to my local coin dealer again today. I bought a 1892 Barber Quarter
UNC, (MS 60-61) for $100. A really great coin. There is a spot on the
face. He told me to "dip it". I replied, "I thought you weren't suppose to
clean coins". He said it wasn't cleaning the coin; slabbers do it as a
matter of course to remove varnish. This is a beautiful coin. I do not
want to touch it.
Has anyone heard of "dipping"? Comments? FWIW, I also bought a 1898 UNC
Barber for $100.

dennis

"Dennis G. Rears" wrote in message
...
I went to my local coin dealer again today. I bought a 1892 Barber Quarter
UNC, (MS 60-61) for $100. A really great coin. There is a spot on the
face. He told me to "dip it". I replied, "I thought you weren't suppose to
clean coins". He said it wasn't cleaning the coin; slabbers do it as a
matter of course to remove varnish. This is a beautiful coin. I do not
want to touch it.
Has anyone heard of "dipping"? Comments? FWIW, I also bought a 1898
UNC Barber for $100.

dennis

The results of dipping are unpredictable. If they were otherwise, why then
would the dealer not have done it himself and priced the now-pristine coin
higher, because it then would look so much nicer?

A comparable phrase exists in the used-car industry: "Those scratches will
buff out."

Believe either at your own peril.

By the way, Coin World's Coin Values lists MS-60 (basal uncirculated) Barber
Quarters at $225. Is the dealer's name Claus by any chance?

James

"James Higby" happily wrote in jest:
By the way, Coin World's Coin Values lists MS-60 (basal uncirculated)
Barber Quarters at $225. Is the dealer's name Claus by any chance?

Hee hee! That's a good one, James!

Larry
'Ira says there isn't one!'

Larry Louks wrote:
"James Higby" happily wrote in jest:
By the way, Coin World's Coin Values lists MS-60 (basal uncirculated)
Barber Quarters at $225. Is the dealer's name Claus by any chance?

Hee hee! That's a good one, James!

Larry
'Ira says there isn't one!'

Dipping.

"Has anyone heard of dipping?" That's a good one.

IMHO the majority (over half) of silver coins at any given coin show
have been worked on.

The question isn't whether or not this makes a historical collectible
coin less desireable, it is a questions of how well the dipping was
done.

As for investment coins, well, caveat emptor.

If you are talking "blast white" silver coins over 120 years old, the
majority (over half) have been dipped at one time or another. Silver
is a reactive metal, and its alloy, copper, even more so.

The big questions about dipping are (1) if the mint lustre is already
gone, nothing you can do will restore it. NOTHING! So don't get out
the dip unless you are sure that there is something underneath the
darkness (2) ditto for wear - if the wear is evident, dipping CANNOT
bring anything back AND it MIGHT uncover defects that were being hidden
by the previous toning, so don't expect dipping to do something it
can't, and (3) always remember that the evidence of dipping on a coin
is cumulative, so a coin can only be dipped a few times before it
shouldn't be done again.

Dips should be done as quickly as possible and you should have the
water in the sink running before you dip the coin - rinse ASAP!

The coin hobby is very schizo about dipping, and as for other forms of
cleaning, most are even more abrasive and SHOULD NOT BE DONE.

Working on encrusted ancient coins is an art itself and is best left
for another post.

oly

On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 22:45:29 -0600, James Higby wrote:


"Dennis G. Rears" wrote in message
...
I went to my local coin dealer again today. I bought a 1892 Barber Quarter
UNC, (MS 60-61) for $100. A really great coin. There is a spot on the
face. He told me to "dip it". I replied, "I thought you weren't suppose to
clean coins". He said it wasn't cleaning the coin; slabbers do it as a
matter of course to remove varnish. This is a beautiful coin. I do not
want to touch it.
Has anyone heard of "dipping"? Comments? FWIW, I also bought a 1898
UNC Barber for $100.

dennis

The results of dipping are unpredictable. If they were otherwise, why then
would the dealer not have done it himself and priced the now-pristine coin
higher, because it then would look so much nicer?

A comparable phrase exists in the used-car industry: "Those scratches will
buff out."

Believe either at your own peril.

By the way, Coin World's Coin Values lists MS-60 (basal uncirculated) Barber
Quarters at $225. Is the dealer's name Claus by any chance?

James

Considering any dealer I know of would be glad to BUY it for 130.00, 150
is greysheet, I find the entire thing, "odd".

I love the scratches line too. It said it all.
"It's just hard to start when the car has been sitting around so long, it
will run fine for you."
--
dw

"oly" wrote in message
oups.com...

Larry Louks wrote:
"James Higby" happily wrote in jest:
By the way, Coin World's Coin Values lists MS-60 (basal uncirculated)
Barber Quarters at $225. Is the dealer's name Claus by any chance?

Hee hee! That's a good one, James!

Larry
'Ira says there isn't one!'

Dipping.

"Has anyone heard of dipping?" That's a good one.

IMHO the majority (over half) of silver coins at any given coin show
have been worked on.

The question isn't whether or not this makes a historical collectible
coin less desireable, it is a questions of how well the dipping was
done.

As for investment coins, well, caveat emptor.

If you are talking "blast white" silver coins over 120 years old, the
majority (over half) have been dipped at one time or another. Silver
is a reactive metal, and its alloy, copper, even more so.

The big questions about dipping are (1) if the mint lustre is already
gone, nothing you can do will restore it. NOTHING! So don't get out
the dip unless you are sure that there is something underneath the
darkness (2) ditto for wear - if the wear is evident, dipping CANNOT
bring anything back AND it MIGHT uncover defects that were being hidden
by the previous toning, so don't expect dipping to do something it
can't, and (3) always remember that the evidence of dipping on a coin
is cumulative, so a coin can only be dipped a few times before it
shouldn't be done again.

Dips should be done as quickly as possible and you should have the
water in the sink running before you dip the coin - rinse ASAP!

The coin hobby is very schizo about dipping, and as for other forms of
cleaning, most are even more abrasive and SHOULD NOT BE DONE.

Working on encrusted ancient coins is an art itself and is best left
for another post.

oly

There was someone here a while back who said you could 'restore' lustre on a
coin by using some soapy water and tapping the coin about a million times
with a soft, worn out toothbrush--sounds like BS to me. It wouldn't leave
radially outwards flow lines but instead would leave unatural looking
hairlines all over.
One way to hide some ugly spots or hairlines is to rub your nose and then
rub that skin oil onto a coin. It works great on a polished up coin--makes
it look like there's some natural lustre. It's like you are faking some flow
lines and after a long time it'll get some natural tone that only human skin
oils leaves on coins. Not any good for an uncirculated coin though and you
have to rub it 'just so' to make it look natural.

"bri" wrote in message
ink.net...

"oly" wrote in message
oups.com...

Larry Louks wrote:
"James Higby" happily wrote in jest:
By the way, Coin World's Coin Values lists MS-60 (basal uncirculated)
Barber Quarters at $225. Is the dealer's name Claus by any chance?

Hee hee! That's a good one, James!

Larry
'Ira says there isn't one!'

Dipping.

"Has anyone heard of dipping?" That's a good one.

IMHO the majority (over half) of silver coins at any given coin show
have been worked on.

The question isn't whether or not this makes a historical collectible
coin less desireable, it is a questions of how well the dipping was
done.

As for investment coins, well, caveat emptor.

If you are talking "blast white" silver coins over 120 years old, the
majority (over half) have been dipped at one time or another. Silver
is a reactive metal, and its alloy, copper, even more so.

The big questions about dipping are (1) if the mint lustre is already
gone, nothing you can do will restore it. NOTHING! So don't get out
the dip unless you are sure that there is something underneath the
darkness (2) ditto for wear - if the wear is evident, dipping CANNOT
bring anything back AND it MIGHT uncover defects that were being hidden
by the previous toning, so don't expect dipping to do something it
can't, and (3) always remember that the evidence of dipping on a coin
is cumulative, so a coin can only be dipped a few times before it
shouldn't be done again.

Dips should be done as quickly as possible and you should have the
water in the sink running before you dip the coin - rinse ASAP!

The coin hobby is very schizo about dipping, and as for other forms of
cleaning, most are even more abrasive and SHOULD NOT BE DONE.

Working on encrusted ancient coins is an art itself and is best left
for another post.

oly

There was someone here a while back who said you could 'restore' lustre on
a
coin by using some soapy water and tapping the coin about a million times
with a soft, worn out toothbrush--sounds like BS to me. It wouldn't leave
radially outwards flow lines but instead would leave unatural looking
hairlines all over.
One way to hide some ugly spots or hairlines is to rub your nose and then
rub that skin oil onto a coin. It works great on a polished up
coin--makes
it look like there's some natural lustre. It's like you are faking some
flow
lines and after a long time it'll get some natural tone that only human
skin
oils leaves on coins. Not any good for an uncirculated coin though and you
have to rub it 'just so' to make it look natural.

Bleaaaaaah!

James

"bri" wrote in message
ink.net...
One way to hide some ugly spots or hairlines is to rub your nose and then
rub that skin oil onto a coin. It works great on a polished up
coin--makes
it look like there's some natural lustre. It's like you are faking some
flow
lines and after a long time it'll get some natural tone that only human
skin
oils leaves on coins. Not any good for an uncirculated coin though and you
have to rub it 'just so' to make it look natural.


I use nose oil to polish out scratches on the used cars I sell. LOL!! JK!

Jonathan_ATC

"Jonathan_ATC" wrote in message
ink.net...

"bri" wrote in message
ink.net...
One way to hide some ugly spots or hairlines is to rub your nose and
then
rub that skin oil onto a coin. It works great on a polished up
coin--makes
it look like there's some natural lustre. It's like you are faking some
flow
lines and after a long time it'll get some natural tone that only human
skin
oils leaves on coins. Not any good for an uncirculated coin though and
you
have to rub it 'just so' to make it look natural.


I use nose oil to polish out scratches on the used cars I sell. LOL!! JK!

Jonathan_ATC


Yeah it sounds funky but supposedly it's a tried and true very old trick.
Can't remember where I read that one--I tried it on an eraser-ized Ike
dollar years ago and it did make it look a lot better but I could still tell
it had been polished up. I'll have to look and see what it looks like
now--it's buried somewhere around here.

"bri" wrote in message
ink.net...

"oly" wrote in message
oups.com...

Larry Louks wrote:
"James Higby" happily wrote in jest:
By the way, Coin World's Coin Values lists MS-60 (basal uncirculated)
Barber Quarters at $225. Is the dealer's name Claus by any chance?

Hee hee! That's a good one, James!

Larry
'Ira says there isn't one!'

Dipping.

"Has anyone heard of dipping?" That's a good one.

IMHO the majority (over half) of silver coins at any given coin show
have been worked on.

The question isn't whether or not this makes a historical collectible
coin less desireable, it is a questions of how well the dipping was
done.

As for investment coins, well, caveat emptor.

If you are talking "blast white" silver coins over 120 years old, the
majority (over half) have been dipped at one time or another. Silver
is a reactive metal, and its alloy, copper, even more so.

The big questions about dipping are (1) if the mint lustre is already
gone, nothing you can do will restore it. NOTHING! So don't get out
the dip unless you are sure that there is something underneath the
darkness (2) ditto for wear - if the wear is evident, dipping CANNOT
bring anything back AND it MIGHT uncover defects that were being hidden
by the previous toning, so don't expect dipping to do something it
can't, and (3) always remember that the evidence of dipping on a coin
is cumulative, so a coin can only be dipped a few times before it
shouldn't be done again.

Dips should be done as quickly as possible and you should have the
water in the sink running before you dip the coin - rinse ASAP!

The coin hobby is very schizo about dipping, and as for other forms of
cleaning, most are even more abrasive and SHOULD NOT BE DONE.

Working on encrusted ancient coins is an art itself and is best left
for another post.

oly

There was someone here a while back who said you could 'restore' lustre on
a
coin by using some soapy water and tapping the coin about a million times
with a soft, worn out toothbrush--sounds like BS to me. It wouldn't leave
radially outwards flow lines but instead would leave unatural looking
hairlines all over.
One way to hide some ugly spots or hairlines is to rub your nose and then
rub that skin oil onto a coin. It works great on a polished up
coin--makes
it look like there's some natural lustre. It's like you are faking some
flow
lines and after a long time it'll get some natural tone that only human
skin
oils leaves on coins. Not any good for an uncirculated coin though and you
have to rub it 'just so' to make it look natural.


The skin oil trick is called "thumbing" in the introduction to the ANA
grading standards book.

TerryS