![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Does anyone know the exact thickness of standard issue Baseball cards?
Thanks in advance for the info! =
__________________
. "A life is not important except in the impact it has on others lives" - Jackie Robinson “If you have a chance to make life better for others and fail to do so, you are wasting your time on this earth.”- Roberto Clemente |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
What year and set? The answer will be different for some. Like Topps 91 and earlier will be different than Topps 92- now. And the other companies will be different still.
I can measure a few to give a rough idea. Paper stock has a range of thickness, so without a big sample size, it's just a rough idea. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
A few samples from one of those 100 cards for $5 boxes I have handy.
All in inches, measured with a passable digital caliper. Well, nowhere near as much difference as I'd thought. Everything there fits between .013 and .016 There were a few companies that I didn't have cards right near the desk, but they're probably in the same range. 1988 OPC .015 2013 Topps .016 (probably a .001 thick glosscoat 2012 Topps .016 (6 cards, all the same, except one at .0165. That's too small of a difference to put much faith in. ) 1997 Score .014 1990 Fleer .015 1987 Topps update .015 1997 Score .014 1991 Stadium club .014 1988 Fleer .015 1990 Score traded .015 1989 Topps .015-.016 2012 Bowman .015 1990 Donruss .013 1988 Topps traded .015-.016 1990 Topps .015-.016 Last edited by steve B; 06-07-2019 at 09:54 AM. Reason: fixed typo |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Thank You, Steve- That's amazing research.
After the Edward Vela thread, my appetite for 'art' and 'custom' cards showed up again and, having suffered with some thin ones in the past, I wanted to be sure any new ones would be thick enough to 'pass' for me. I'm looking at some that are 1.56 mil. which fits in the range you described. There's an awful lot of absolute junk art and custom cards, but there are also some that are very well done indeed. Thanks again, Robbie .
__________________
. "A life is not important except in the impact it has on others lives" - Jackie Robinson “If you have a chance to make life better for others and fail to do so, you are wasting your time on this earth.”- Roberto Clemente |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
I think that would be pretty cool, like the thicker cards we see for some inserts. some of the modern sets used to come with a blank thick insert to hide the inserts from pack feelers. I have/had a stack of them somewhere, but I may have given them to the kids. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Well, either my eyes or my reading...or both have gotten worse. As it turned out, of the four cards I was considering, only one was left and the price was too high. Thanks again. =
__________________
. "A life is not important except in the impact it has on others lives" - Jackie Robinson “If you have a chance to make life better for others and fail to do so, you are wasting your time on this earth.”- Roberto Clemente Last edited by clydepepper; 06-08-2019 at 07:07 AM. |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
1964 Topps Thickness & Color Variation | xdrx | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 22 | 12-01-2022 09:21 AM |
Ultra Pro 9 pocket pages for patch/relic cards + 70 pt thickness? | Beastmode | Modern Baseball Cards Forum (1980-Present) | 1 | 08-28-2017 11:07 AM |
Question about E97 C. A. Briggs Co. thickness | Mainstreetsportscards | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 0 | 02-13-2015 10:35 PM |
Thickness of T201 Mecca Double Folders | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 6 | 10-18-2006 04:58 PM |
1915 Standard Biscuit card questions | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 2 | 10-17-2001 01:35 PM |