Half quarter

[rwsnc]

I decided to tumble some quarters and came across this half quarter. I'm pretty sure it's not a mint error mainly because of all the scratches on the copper. It looks like someone managed to de-layer the layers.

It's exactly 1 mm thick. A normal clad quarter is 1.68 mm thick.

Any ideas or has anyone seen anything like this before?

By the way, the other half didn't show up in the tumbler.

Obverse:

Reverse:

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[RPG]

You can get 12 1/2 cents for that one.

 

[B|lker]

I`ll give you 13 cents.

 

[rwsnc]

I`ll give you 13 cents.

I don't know... looks like a lot of copper there.

 

[B|lker]

Cool, i can even see the reeded edge on the obverse.
Bill

 

[goldencoin]

Perhaps half of a trick coin (two tails) The scratches would give a better hold for the glue

HH
-GC

 

[Tony in SC]

Looks like sawblade marks. Someone went to a lot of trouble to do that . Have you heard of Two Bits? Well that would be One Bit. Cool find . Tony

 

[j.n.]

Many years ago I found a sliver dime that was modified as the quarter was modified. I put it up and thought of it as a magician coin. Like you I never did find the other side. of the coin.

J.N.

 

[rwsnc]

Goldencoin... that's an interesting possibility. Hadn't thought about that.


TonyinSC... At first I thought that someone hammered a pin of some sort all around the coin but the scratch marks are all on the flat surface. The edge of the coin doesn't show any signs of that.

J.N. ... That's really unusual for a silver coin since that's not "sandwiched", unless someone sanded the face off.

 

[ivan salis]

psst the 1965 clad quarters had issues * they did not stay together well -- often if dropped or hit strongly they would break apart -- the mint fix the issue by 1966 however --so its other half might have read 1965

 

[rwsnc]

psst the 1965 clad quarters had issues * they did not stay together well -- often if dropped or hit strongly they would break apart -- the mint fix the issue by 1966 however --so its other half might have read 1965

Thanks for the info. I've never heard that. That COULD be the answer. Wonder where the scratches came from, though.

 

[ivan salis]

from where the bonding process did not take properly

 

[j.n.]

The dime I found had probably been turned on a lathe by someone who was very good as the worked side was beautifully done.

 

[rwsnc]

The dime I found had probably been turned on a lathe by someone who was very good as the worked side was beautifully done.

As opposed to the worked side of the quarter which looks like it was done by a butcher.