Mint sets from the Mint, quality or crap?

DAM

Is it me, or are mint sets from the Mint a waste of money. I've been buying numerous sets a year directly from the Mint for years. It wasn't until recently that I noticed the poor qualilty. I just get them and store them. I haven't looked at any of the sets since 1992. What a shock.

Honestly, I don't see how they can be proud to put out such CRAP!! Some of the coins I have in "original mint packaging" wouldn't grade MS. That's how bad they are. It seems the nickels are worse then the other coins.

Starting next year my order will not include mint sets, until I see a DRAMATIC improvement. I can get better quality from pocket change!

Anyone else feel this way?

beorn

the 2002 mint sets i got may be a new low in quality

fcloud

I only buy the proof sets. I find better coins in my change than what was coming in the mint sets when I stopped buying them in the 1980's... (I did get a few in 1996 because of the W dime.)

Get you loose coins from change or rolls, you'll find higher grades.

andy007

I haven't bought any of the 2002's, but it seems like some of the more recent ones have been nicer quality than years past. I can only think of the 1996 as having above average quality for 2 or more coins in each set that I have ever tried to pick through. The mid-80's sets are atrocious.

NIckelCollector

2002 - mostly low end. I purchased 50 sets (1000 coins) with maybe 40 that were submitted to PCGS. The Jefferson nickels were horrible.

40 out of 1000 coins = 4% pretty low - but still one of the more economical ways to find modern high end coins.

Frank

cladking

I'm not very familiar with the post 1998 sets yet. First impressions are that '99 is poor,
'00 is little better, and the '01 is much better. The '94 to '98 sets are pretty good but don't know
how all the denominations are compared to BU rolls. (quarters are better in the sets). With
all the other post '67 sets the best coins are almost always found in the mint sets. There are
several exceptions and mint sets coins don't always exist for the circulation issues. On aver-
age though only about 4% of mint set cents, 1% of nickels, 6% of dimes. 4% quarters, 3%
halfs, and 1% of dollars are nice choice gems. It does vary by year and coins like the '76 t1
Ike, '69 quarter, '72-D cent, and '89-D quarter are extremely elusive. And other coins like a
72-D quarter are relatively easy. Some of these coins are almost impossible to find in rolls at
all. Original rolls simply don't exist on the marketplace for some. Even if they did, gems might
be non-existent in them.

Really poor coins tend to be quite common in sets. The strikes of mint set coins are usually
much better than BU rolls but many are extremely marked up. They also suffer from spotting,
inferior planchets, and even damage from the machine that seals the plastic. (especially mid-70's sets)

DIMEMAN

Sounds like I haven't missed much by not buying from the mint. I haven't bought anything in the last 25 years except the Silver Proof Sets to get the State quarters in silver proof. The reason was that it seemed like all you had to do was wait and buy they in the secondary market for less money. That is if you wanted them at all. I just hate spending money on modern crap. Give me the classics any day.

Jon

cladking

Dimeman; You and everyone else! That's why so many of these are so elusive. Very
few people collected any moderns until the last few years.

This also isn't nearly as bad as it sounds. There are as many as 12 coins in these sets
so the odds of a gem in any given set aren't that poor. Remember, too, that this refers
to "nice" gems. Yes the poor coins are commn and the gems are a little tough, but in be-
tween there are substantial numbers of nice attractive coins and near gems. If you add
in the near gems and not as nice gems then two mint sets out of three have at least one
gem. The odds aren't that poor. These coins look pretty good due to attractive surfaces
and their nearly uniformly good strikes all the way down to about MS-62. Almost all the
sets will have a couple coins of this quality.



2nd paragraph added.

relayer

According to PCGS the ones I submit are ALL CRAP

MJCoin

Maybe I'm missing something but if every coin issued from the US Mint was perfect...
There would be no reason to search for the elusive Low Pop coins.
What fun would that be?

DAM

Michael,

My point was to address the "quality" of the coins I've found. I wasn't expecting every coin, in every set, to be MS67+ or better. Having said that, why should I purchase coins directly from the Mint, at a greater cost than I can get them from the bank? Or pick them out of change? Just for the packaging? Not anymore! The coins I saw looked like they had been dropped on a rough cement floor, scooped up with a bobcat, packaged, and then sold.

I looked through about 12 years of mint sets, 10 for each year, about a week ago. Sets that were previously unopened, still in boxes. To my surprise, many of the sets contained coins that were of MS61/MS62 quality. Mixed in were coins I don't think would make the MS level due to marks. They were terrible! The nickels were especially bad. I know not every coin that comes out of the Mint is MS65 quality. But sell something better than what I'm seeing is my point.

Like I said, I'm not demanding a "Pop Top" coin in every set. On the other hand, I'm not going to pay $12 or $13, what ever the price is today, for $0.91 worth of coins I can get in change, that are in better condition. I can buy a plastic holder to put them in myself and still be money ahead, which is what I'm going to do if I want a mint set next year. At least until I see the coin quality go up.

Hope that clears up my perspective.