Dip or no dip?

I vote that RF is a dip.

"Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote in message
...

....
Quite frankly, grading services will *advertise* that they will not slab
cleaned coins (they rejected one of mine the first time I submitted it,
but slabbed it when I submitted the exact same coin the second time), but
then you'll go to coin shows and see cleaned coin after cleaned coin, even
in the so-called "respectable" slabs. Some people will tell you that it
has to do with the rarity of the coins, but that's only partially true. I
recently submitted a coin with a survivorship of fewer than a hundred
examples that, yes, looked like it may have been cleaned 100 years ago,
but it came back ungraded in a "genuine" holder from PCGS. The latest
chic in the industry is to use the expression "second skin" to refer to
coins that have retoned after a cleaning. It's entirely subjective,
arbitrary, and capricious, from where I sit.

I wonder how many graders are employed by the top TPGs for various coin
types. One sharp-eyed "by the book" grader might zing a coin as "cleaned"
even if that happened 50 years ago and the coin no longer looks freshly
cleaned, while the grader at the next desk might for various reasons give it
a pass and a grade. So even within a given time frame in the history of a
TPG's practices there might be differing assessments of coins. There's no
way to go "grader shopping" at a given TPG but the more graders for a given
type then the better the odds that at least one of them will overlook light
cleaning from the distant pass (not to mention other problems).

As far as your coins are concerned, it depends on what that surface crud
is. If it consists of deposits of "copper wax" (skin oils, dirt, other
things we'd best not name) around the lettering, this stuff can be removed
mechanically with the sharp end of a green rose thorn without damaging the
coin in any way.

Huh. I knew there was a reason for keeping that scraggly rose bush that
never thrives despite my best ministrations, but won't die either.

Hot damn! I can see the e-Bay listing now:

"You are bidding on a 6-inch length of genuine rose stem guaranteed to
contain 2-4 thorns. Rose thorns are a proven safe way to remove surface
crud from coins without damaging the surface. Starting bid 99 cents plus
$4.95 S&H. Buy It Now for $7.50 + S&H."

If it's corrosion, then all bets are off. Peter's formula is essentially
a solvent-based approach to the problem, and as he says, works best with
silver coins.

Anyone have any current thoughts on the use of sonic cleaners? My tests
with common circulated coins have shown moderate to significant cleansing
effect with no discernible damage. It won't eliminate really cruddy toning
but it can "tone it down" so to speak. It's particularly gratifying when a
coin with light to moderate gray patina but sharply struck features comes
out looking almost new. Clad coins seem to do best, then silver. Copper
also shines up a bit but it's not going to change a brown into a red or red
into mint BU. It has little effect on heavy encrustations.

As with James' home recipe, thorough flushing with tap water followed by a
dip in distilled water is essential to remove the sonic cleaning detergents.

On Jul 18, 6:26*pm, Michael Benveniste wrote:
It's time to play that wonderful game of dip or no dip. *Let's meet
today's contestant, an AU 1851-O trime:

http://wemightneedthat.biz/trime-obv.../trime-rev.jpg

So what says the jury? *Should this coin keey it's authentic
"patina" accrued over the last 150+ years, or is it time for a
refreshing and revitalizing bath?

--
Mike Benveniste -- (Clarification Required)
Its name is Public opinion. *It is held in reverence. *It settles
everything.Some think it is the voice of God. -- Mark Twain

If I remember correctly, silver trimes are only 75% silver, the
remainder of the alloy being copper. Any commercial coin dip will
produce an odd pinkish cast to the coin which will evident in a few
weeks to a few months, depending upon storage conditions. That would
be tell tale evidence of a dipping or cleaning, a no-no for coins
containing more than 10% copper in the alloy. As unattractive as i is,
I still wouldn't dip it. Besides, as others have said here, there's
is no guarantee that the black mottled tone would disappear with a
dipping. I think it won't disappear. Why did you buy such a con
anyway, Mike?

Ira

"mazorj" wrote in message
...


Anyone have any current thoughts on the use of sonic cleaners? My tests
with common circulated coins have shown moderate to significant cleansing
effect with no discernible damage. It won't eliminate really cruddy
toning but it can "tone it down" so to speak. It's particularly
gratifying when a coin with light to moderate gray patina but sharply
struck features comes out looking almost new. Clad coins seem to do best,
then silver. Copper also shines up a bit but it's not going to change a
brown into a red or red into mint BU. It has little effect on heavy
encrustations.


I bought a sonic cleaner several years ago and tried it once on some foreign
coins, silver and non. I was disappointed in that the coins had a very
"cleaned" appearance and I never tried my sonic cleaner again, but I should
give it several more tries. I think maybe circulated coins, even those
lightly circulated, just don't look natural when totally clean. Honestly,
it was not fair for me to judge on one attempt.

Bill

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 08:25:38 -0700 (PDT), Ira wrote:

Why did you buy such a coin anyway, Mike?

Let's just say I was a victim of an "enhanced" photograph and a fairly
busy non-collecting schedule. An 1851-O has been on my want list for
a while and I got impatient. I do have another one in about Fr-2
which I've had since I was a kid.

Thanks for the advice!

--
Mike Benveniste -- (Clarification Required)
Its name is Public opinion. It is held in reverence. It settles
everything.Some think it is the voice of God. -- Mark Twain

"Bill Krummel" wrote in message
...

"mazorj" wrote in message
...

Anyone have any current thoughts on the use of sonic cleaners? My tests
with common circulated coins have shown moderate to significant cleansing
effect with no discernible damage. It won't eliminate really cruddy
toning but it can "tone it down" so to speak. It's particularly
gratifying when a coin with light to moderate gray patina but sharply
struck features comes out looking almost new. Clad coins seem to do
best, then silver. Copper also shines up a bit but it's not going to
change a brown into a red or red into mint BU. It has little effect on
heavy encrustations.

I bought a sonic cleaner several years ago and tried it once on some
foreign coins, silver and non. I was disappointed in that the coins had a
very "cleaned" appearance and I never tried my sonic cleaner again, but I
should give it several more tries. I think maybe circulated coins, even
those lightly circulated, just don't look natural when totally clean.
Honestly, it was not fair for me to judge on one attempt.

True, coins with any noticeable wear will look "wrong" if a cleaning gives
them an unnatural shininess. However, sometimes I'll bend the rules. For
example, with common coins in a folder being built with inexpensive
circulation finds, the priority may be making them esthetically "purty" to
the eye rather than preserving them in their found condition - especially if
it's just an exercise in getting kids interested in collecting.

If the coin is well-struck and has little to no wear, I like the way that a
sonic cleaning can remove the light surface haze that can settle on coins
even after just a little handling and circulation. Sometimes you even find
a little original mint luster buried in fields under the hazy surface
toning. Whether this affects value by "damaging" the coin is more a matter
of philosophy than forensics since in most cases you probably couldn't tell
from examination that a coin that otherwise would grade in the high 50's or
low 60s had been cleaned this way. For silver coins my unit can't come
close to the ghastly blast white that comes from harsh chemical dips. And
as with James' home brew, you're not doing anything that would add wear or
leave scratches, which are a sure indication of abrasive cleaning.

Note than the results depend on how long you run the unit plus the type and
concentration of the cleaning agent. I use the recommended amount of a
general purpose cleaner and run 2 or 3 of its 5-minute cycles. There are
other formulations made specifically for jewelry and other materials. I
haven't tried any of them.

mazorj wrote:
"Bill Krummel" wrote in message
...

"mazorj" wrote in message
...

Anyone have any current thoughts on the use of sonic cleaners? My
tests with common circulated coins have shown moderate to
significant cleansing effect with no discernible damage. It won't
eliminate really cruddy toning but it can "tone it down" so to
speak. It's particularly gratifying when a coin with light to
moderate gray patina but sharply struck features comes out looking
almost new. Clad coins seem to do best, then silver. Copper also
shines up a bit but it's not going to change a brown into a red or
red into mint BU. It has little effect on heavy encrustations.

I bought a sonic cleaner several years ago and tried it once on some
foreign coins, silver and non. I was disappointed in that the coins
had a very "cleaned" appearance and I never tried my sonic cleaner
again, but I should give it several more tries. I think maybe
circulated coins, even those lightly circulated, just don't look
natural when totally clean. Honestly, it was not fair for me to
judge on one attempt.

True, coins with any noticeable wear will look "wrong" if a cleaning
gives them an unnatural shininess. However, sometimes I'll bend the
rules. For example, with common coins in a folder being built with
inexpensive circulation finds, the priority may be making them
esthetically "purty" to the eye rather than preserving them in their
found condition - especially if it's just an exercise in getting kids
interested in collecting.
If the coin is well-struck and has little to no wear, I like the way
that a sonic cleaning can remove the light surface haze that can
settle on coins even after just a little handling and circulation.
Sometimes you even find a little original mint luster buried in
fields under the hazy surface toning. Whether this affects value by
"damaging" the coin is more a matter of philosophy than forensics
since in most cases you probably couldn't tell from examination that
a coin that otherwise would grade in the high 50's or low 60s had
been cleaned this way. For silver coins my unit can't come close to
the ghastly blast white that comes from harsh chemical dips. And as
with James' home brew, you're not doing anything that would add wear
or leave scratches, which are a sure indication of abrasive cleaning.
Note than the results depend on how long you run the unit plus the
type and concentration of the cleaning agent. I use the recommended
amount of a general purpose cleaner and run 2 or 3 of its 5-minute
cycles. There are other formulations made specifically for jewelry
and other materials. I haven't tried any of them.

I regularly have pocket change go through the automatic washer. They come
out quite free of grease and dirt, but they look unnatural, not really
something I'd be proud to display. Maybe I should switch laundry
detergents?

BTW, to give proper credit, the "home brew" mentioned above was suggested by
Peter, not me. My "home brew" is much more drinkable!

James [hic!]

On Jul 19, 5:39*pm, "Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote:
mazorj wrote:
"Bill Krummel" wrote in message
...

"mazorj" wrote in message
...

Anyone have any current thoughts on the use of sonic cleaners? *My
tests with common circulated coins have shown moderate to
significant cleansing effect with no discernible damage. *It won't
eliminate really cruddy toning but it can "tone it down" so to
speak. *It's particularly gratifying when a coin with light to
moderate gray patina but sharply struck features comes out looking
almost new. *Clad coins seem to do best, then silver. *Copper also
shines up a bit but it's not going to change a brown into a red or
red into mint BU. *It has little effect on heavy encrustations.

I bought a sonic cleaner several years ago and tried it once on some
foreign coins, silver and non. *I was disappointed in that the coins
had a very "cleaned" appearance and I never tried my sonic cleaner
again, but I should give it several more tries. *I think maybe
circulated coins, even those lightly circulated, just don't look
natural when totally clean. Honestly, it was not fair for me to
judge on one attempt.

True, coins with any noticeable wear will look "wrong" if a cleaning
gives them an unnatural shininess. *However, sometimes I'll bend the
rules. *For example, with common coins in a folder being built with
inexpensive circulation finds, the priority may be making them
esthetically "purty" to the eye rather than preserving them in their
found condition - especially if it's just an exercise in getting kids
interested in collecting.
If the coin is well-struck and has little to no wear, I like the way
that a sonic cleaning can remove the light surface haze that can
settle on coins even after just a little handling and circulation.
Sometimes you even find a little original mint luster buried in
fields under the hazy surface toning. *Whether this affects value by
"damaging" the coin is more a matter of philosophy than forensics
since in most cases you probably couldn't tell from examination that
a coin that otherwise would grade in the high 50's or low 60s had
been cleaned this way. *For silver coins my unit can't come close to
the ghastly blast white that comes from harsh chemical dips. *And as
with James' home brew, you're not doing anything that would add wear
or leave scratches, which are a sure indication of abrasive cleaning.
Note than the results depend on how long you run the unit plus the
type and concentration of the cleaning agent. *I use the recommended
amount of a general purpose cleaner and run 2 or 3 of its 5-minute
cycles. *There are other formulations made specifically for jewelry
and other materials. *I haven't tried any of them.

I regularly have pocket change go through the automatic washer. *They come
out quite free of grease and dirt, but they look unnatural, not really
something I'd be proud to display. *Maybe I should switch laundry
detergents?

BTW, to give proper credit, the "home brew" mentioned above was suggested by
Peter, not me. *My "home brew" is much more drinkable!

James [hic!]- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I've been forced to give up on that sort of home brew (the last batch
exploded under the piano).

"Michael Benveniste" wrote in message
...
It's time to play that wonderful game of dip or no dip. Let's meet
today's contestant, an AU 1851-O trime:

http://wemightneedthat.biz/trime-obv.jpg
http://wemightneedthat.biz/trime-rev.jpg

So what says the jury? Should this coin keey it's authentic
"patina" accrued over the last 150+ years, or is it time for a
refreshing and revitalizing bath?

--
Mike Benveniste -- (Clarification Required)
Its name is Public opinion. It is held in reverence. It settles
everything.Some think it is the voice of God. -- Mark Twain

Tough coin to find nice, I'd submit to NCS.

Steve

"Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote in message
...

....
I regularly have pocket change go through the automatic washer. They come
out quite free of grease and dirt, but they look unnatural, not really
something I'd be proud to display. Maybe I should switch laundry
detergents?

Coins that go through the laundry wash are abraded by the rather coarse
pocket material during all that agitation. Even if they eventually work
their way loose into the tub they're still going to get a lot of surface
contact. So they come out really shiny but with those little
micro-scratches that come with abrasive cleaning. I don't have one handy to
compare, but unless you're talking about the mob, laundered money is
unnaturally clean. As I recall, all other things being equal, these coins
got a stronger cleaning and came out shinier than what my sonic scrubbing
can produce.

But as I said, this is reserved for special uses such as making a grandson's
or nephew's eyes sparkle at the sparkling appearance of a circulation-built
coin folder with holes left for him to fill. At that age, beauty is in the
eyes of the young beholder and they don't quite understand or agree with the
admonitions about not routinely cleaning coins. Time enough for them to
learn that after they get hooked.

BTW, to give proper credit, the "home brew" mentioned above was suggested
by Peter, not me. My "home brew" is much more drinkable!

My apologies to Peter. I've seen instructions similar to this elsewhere so
it must be a standard, well-accepted method for light, gentle cleaning.

Coincidentally, yesterday I received a bottle of Koinsolv that I ordered
just to experiment with. It claims that it only removes surface gunk and
doesn't remove oxidation, corrosion, toning, or spots. Anyone have any
thoughts on its use or caveats against it?