Comoro Islands 50 Francs KM#16a

Hello, 

I've got these two coins. Different composition and weight and yet, same catalogue number. 

What am I missing? 

Krause says both date are nickel plated steel, which explains the same reference number.

So Krause is wrong or Numista is wrong, probably Krause.

Krause is definitely wrong here: both the appearence AND the weight prove that the coins are of different material!

N#43484

I raise this topic since, in my case, the coin I have from 2001 is non-magnetic, so it could not be made of “Nickel plated steel” as it says on the page.

I have been looking on the Internet and everywhere I have found Nickel or Nickel plated steel, so in any case it should be magnetic...but mine is not. 

Does the same thing happen to anyone else who has this 2001 coin? Any information will be well received, thank you!!!!

All my 50 francs are magnetic: 

Yes, I have imagined it. Thanks for the information, Ole. I guess I have a different coin than it should be, but I don't know why. 

The technical characteristics (weight and diameter) fully match, even visually it is closer to the others (all magnetic) than to the typical copper-nickel color.

Perhaps it would be good to wait to see if there are more people who can provide data about their own 2001 coin and, perhaps, write in comments: The existence of non-magnetic piece for 2001 dated coin has been reported.

My coins weigh in differently :

2001 weighs 6.00g

2013 weighs 5.61g

(diameter and thickness are equal)

My coins too, but ia according to the data in Numista :

2001 weighs 6.04g (Non magnetic)

2013 weighs 5.74g  (Magnetic)

Maybe little difference in color?

You can't really judge an alloy by its color. It's strange for your 2001, maybe there is not enough nickel in it to be magnetic (something like > 68%?)

Sjoelund

 maybe there is not enough nickel in it to be magnetic (something like > 68%?)

Doesn't matter.  The nickel plating is pure nickel but even without it the underlying steel is highly (ferro)magnetic.

Yes, I have also thought something like that, but in theory, according to Numista, it is Nickel (magnetic) and plated steel (magnetic too), so it is difficult for me to understand. I only see the option of it being copper-nickel, but the tone is more steel...something crazy!!! ;)

oynbcn

My coins too, but ia according to the data in Numista :

 

2001 weighs 6.04g (Non magnetic)

2013 weighs 5.74g  (Magnetic)

 

Maybe little difference in color?

 

My coins exactly - 2001 non-magnetic, 2013 magnetic! 

oynbcn

My coins too, but ia according to the data in Numista :

 

2001 weighs 6.04g (Non magnetic)

2013 weighs 5.74g  (Magnetic)

 

Maybe little difference in color?

 

My coins exactly - 2001 non-magnetic, 2013 magnetic! 

Same denomination, 1975 (KM#9) and 1994 (KM#16) also magnetic. 

Dejan

oynbcn

My coins too, but ia according to the data in Numista :

 

2001 weighs 6.04g (Non magnetic)

2013 weighs 5.74g  (Magnetic)

 

Maybe little difference in color?

 

My coins exactly - 2001 non-magnetic, 2013 magnetic! 

Same denomination, 1975 (KM#9) and 1994 (KM#16) also magnetic. 

Hi Dejan, thanks for the information. I suppose that there will no longer be owners who indicate whether their coin is magnetic or not, so I think that two non-magnetic coins is enough for something to be written in the Comments field like: 

“Non-magnetic coins have been reported for this coin”

Another option could be to include a new year line with the comment "Non-magnetic" and write "Magnetic" in the existing one. 

I know that, probably, a new page should be made with the non-magnetic option, but not knowing the composition I don't even know if it would be the best solution.

What is your opinion?

Please also make those two coins in numista show the same obverse / reverse, it looks strange just now?

I vote for: include a new year line with the comment "Non-magnetic" and write "Magnetic" in the existing one. 

I would vote for a comment only, no new year line until there is some evidence that the non-magnetic version was made on purpose.  As of now all we can assume is that the non-magnetic coins are error coins (wrong planchet).  Mint errors should not have their own year line.

But, I wouldn't be offended if anyone disagreed.  

Me neither, it just has to be mentioned.

Just to make things clear: does anyone have a magnetic 2001? 

Magnetic, yes!

In case you missed it:

 I have sent a modification request to add what was previously mentioned in Comments field.

Dejan

Just to make things clear: does anyone have a magnetic 2001? 

I know it's an old topic, but: yes.
I have two 50-franc coins dated 2001, one is non-magnetic and the other one is magnetic, both weigh 6,04 g.

The only difference between them that I notice is the color: the non-magnetic is closer to copper-nickel in color while the magnetic one is brighter like pure nickel.

As a theory, the non-magnetic version might be a coating error.

The steel core may be non-magnetic in one or both coins, because as we remember from Italian and Albanian coinage from early 1940-s, steel is not always magnetic. 

No, steel is always magnetic. The coins you were referring to are stainless steel which can be magnetic or non magnetic depending on grade.  If this coin is stainless steel it would be silly to use a plating to keep it from corroding.