Some returns to numismatic basics l'd like to see
LanLord
Posts: 11,714 ✭✭✭✭✭
I know, we have probably beat this dead horse enough, but I get pretty frustrated with the fact that a lot of our coinage
just seem to be status quo. It is, what it is and that's not about to change.
I'd like to see a return to some basics. I know intrinsic value is out of the question, but here are some changes that
should be possible without effecting the mint's bottom line
1 - Place denticles back on coins, or perhaps some other rim defining pattern (like the SLQ used on the obverse)
2 - Lettered edges on dimes and large denomination coins, I wouldn't mind on cents and nickles, but not mandatory
3 - Return the mintmark to the reverse of coins
4 - "Old standby requirement" Return Lady Liberty or other image of Freedom to our coins, alternately
no real people or real places depicted on regular circulation coinage, that should be reserved for commems
5 - Make change mandatory at 25 year intervals - for goodness sake no more "century" designs.
6 - Let the artists work show, slow down the mint presses, reaise the relief and return to multi-strike hubbing
7 - A suggestion for the Commems, Mint state and PROOF specimins should be struck at different mints
There now, that's not too difficult is it?
just seem to be status quo. It is, what it is and that's not about to change.
I'd like to see a return to some basics. I know intrinsic value is out of the question, but here are some changes that
should be possible without effecting the mint's bottom line
1 - Place denticles back on coins, or perhaps some other rim defining pattern (like the SLQ used on the obverse)
2 - Lettered edges on dimes and large denomination coins, I wouldn't mind on cents and nickles, but not mandatory
3 - Return the mintmark to the reverse of coins
4 - "Old standby requirement" Return Lady Liberty or other image of Freedom to our coins, alternately
no real people or real places depicted on regular circulation coinage, that should be reserved for commems
5 - Make change mandatory at 25 year intervals - for goodness sake no more "century" designs.
6 - Let the artists work show, slow down the mint presses, reaise the relief and return to multi-strike hubbing
7 - A suggestion for the Commems, Mint state and PROOF specimins should be struck at different mints
There now, that's not too difficult is it?
0
Comments
6 - Let the artists work show, slow down the mint presses, reaise the relief and return to multi-strike hubbing
Slowing down the presses is never going to happen for normal production runs. It all comes down to the bean counters. Slowing down the presses would increase the cost of each unit by at LEAST .000004 cents EACH!!! UNACCEPTABLE!!!
Zulan
<< <i>6 - Let the artists work show, slow down the mint presses, reaise the relief and return to multi-strike hubbing >>
Is this even possible with the clad composition these days?
<< <i>There now, that's not too difficult is it? >>
Talk to the politicians
Here are my comments on some of your points:
#2. Dimes and quarters never had lettered edges, not even in the early 1800s, because they were too thin. Lettered edges provided a way to discourage the removal of precious metal from the edges of our coins. Latter reeding served the same purpose. In the 1800s lettered edges were placed on coins by a separate operation. In the early 1900s a segmented collar was used to put lettered edges on the St. Gaudens $10 and $20 coins. Otherwise the coin would be struck and then forever jammed in the collar. Putting lettered edges on business strike coins would add expense for no practical purpose.
#5. Change the design every 25 years. That rule was not more than a recommendation and it was only really enforced with the Barber coinage. I’d leave things open although I agree that it would be good to change designs more often than every century.
#6. Slowing down the press and going to high relief would add to minting expenses. Besides high relief is not always a good thing. The Standing Liberty Quarter is a pretty coin when it is fully struck, but the design was so flawed that that seldom happened after 1917. I’m happy with the relief for business strikes just as it is.
Coins are no longer made of precious metals, so nobody is going to file the silver or gold off. Get rid of the reeds I say, to mix things up...it's not like the reeds help that much when you're looking for coins in your pocket.
Also, coins should be thicker I think. Look at the Euro and the Pound coins. Those coins are nice and thick, in relation to their diameter.
It would be a better way to distinguish a dollar coin from fractional coins.
one fact that eludes many is that during much of the 1800's our coinage design for all denominations was limited to just two types, copper was one pattern and everything else another. how depressing is that?? at least today we have variety yet, as a rule, collectors are still unhappy. at the same time, the general public seems satisfied and they far outnumber us. but hey, i don't want to be a wet blanket!!! as others have pointed out the nature of minting coinage for the size of our economy requires certain concessions to process and design.
funny, noone ever seems to mention the reverse designs, it's always the same old song-and-dance about dead presidents!!! while i agree, it's an uphill battle and probably won't change soon. absent the efforts of Theodore Roosevelt in the early 1900's our coinage would have been without some striking designs. we probably need a pro-active president to step up. after all, that's really his job, isn't it, to set policy?? what could be more important than to attempt to have in place a policy which affects the way many around the world perceive us by what they see on our coinage?? that is, after all, the whole intent of the Liberty design and the motto's, despite insistence that the designs are supposed to be somehow aestetically pleasing to us collectors.
al h.
faces of the coins. Some of it could be shortened too, like United States of America, Quarter
Dollar, could be shortened to USA 25c.
The original clads were struck with the same relief as the silver coins were. There was init-
ially a great deal of problem with die wear and poor strikes but this was largely overcome
before the design was lowered to the point it's at now. Many of these newer coins
are going to appear excessively worn in only another ten years or so because there is so
much less design to be rubbed away. Indeed, the height of the designs has been lowered
at about the same rate at which the older coins are wearing away in circulation. At some point
in the future all the clads will appear to be equally worn out.
With todays far better die steels it would be a relatively inexpensive proposition to restore
the reliefs to where they were in the distant past. Much of the bottleneck at this time would
be in the die shops which would have to increase production significantly to keep up with
increased die wear. At the current time they are still pretty busy making the huge number
of cent dies necessary to crank out pennys which have too little value to actually circulate.
I don't see any point whatsoever to moving the mintmark or mandating change every twenty
five years but certainly agree with all the other points. We need more modern designs with-
out individuals as the subject. We need to limit the proliferation of new issues including
those made for circulation and we need improved quality in all mint output.
typos
<< <i>
<< <i>There now, that's not too difficult is it? >>
Talk to the politicians >>
There's an old saying...
Those who respect the law and love to eat sausage should never watch either being made.
I'd really like to see the MM on the reverse of regular issues as well.
One thing not mentioned - having the "P" MM die a greusome, firery death.
SAE business strikes are the only coins I know of that have no "P" MM and have the MM on the reverse.
Photos of the 2006 Boston Massacre
<< <i>3 - Return the mintmark to the reverse of coins >>
Disagree -- MMs on obverse make for better album presentations.
<< <i>7 - A suggestion for the Commems, Mint state and PROOF specimins should be struck at different mints >>
Well, as recently as the 2001 Buffalo this is the case. Which mint strikes which commem doesn't really bug me, tho'.
For some reason non-collectors believe to drop a Presidents face from a coin is some how disrespectful. To drop Washington, Lincoln, Jefferson, FDR, or Kennedy is somehow a slap in their "face" so to speak. The designs have been in place too long (so long that very few of us can remember their predecessors). I am 39, and not one of these coins' obverses has changed significantly in my life time.
Just look at the politics that came into play to (temporarily) change the reverse of the nickel. Give me a break. Once the 50-state quarter program ends, if I see that old ugly eagle again I will cry.
The easiest obverse to change is the nickel. Here is my logic... Washington was the first President, father of our country, etc. Lincoln was the President that led our country during the civil war and was assasinated. FDR served the longest of any President, led our country during WW2 and died in office. Kennedy was the first President born in the 1900's and was a symbol of the "new era", and was assasinated. Jefferson does not stack up well against those four. I know that Jefferson was the third President and the author of the Declaration of Independence, but in comparison to the other four, if you can't change the obverse of the nickel, you will not be able to change the obverse to any of the others.
What we need is a Secretary of the Treasury (I believe this is correct) with the guts to make the changes that can be made by him/her without Congressional approval. I believe the Secretary can make changes without Congressional approval if the design has been in place a minimum number of years (which certainly applies to all but the SAC). I am sure if this is incorrect others will correct me.
The original clads were struck with the same relief as the silver coins were.
I'm glad that cladking made that point- I hadn't really realized how the relief on current coins has been shrunk to almost nothing. Extra low relief coins are especially not interesting from a asthetic point of view......
No objection and I don't see where it would cause a problem. Some may object that it makes the coins look "old-fashioned"
2 - Lettered edges on dimes and large denomination coins, I wouldn't mind on cents and nickles, but not mandatory
As pointed out above the dimes and quarters never had lettered edges and I don't really think this would be a good idea as it would either require an additional manufacturing step, or a segmented collar with its additional complexity. They might be able to add the edge lettering when they upset the rims but you may have problems with the edge inscriptions being crushed during a close collar striking. (I have some Conder tokens that show this problem. Lettered edge planchets struck in plain collars that have almost completely wiped out the inscriptions.) The Mint may want to talk to the British Royal Mint to see how they solved the problem with the round pound.
3 - Return the mintmark to the reverse of coins
I don't see this as important or nessesary.
4 - "Old standby requirement" Return Lady Liberty or other image of Freedom to our coins, alternately
no real people or real places depicted on regular circulation coinage, that should be reserved for commems
In complete agreement with this. Use of real people causes a lot of trouble when changes are suggested.
5 - Make change mandatory at 25 year intervals - for goodness sake no more "century" designs.
In full agreement. The Act of 1890 only restricted changes to no more often than 25 years and then allowed allowed thedesigns to be changed by the Sec of the Treasury without Congressional approval. During the early years of this century they mis-interpreted it to mean the designs HAD to be changed every 25 years and we got changes and fresh designs. Then when dead presidents began appearing politics entered into the equation and we now have designs that are older than 90% of the population. Unless the Act of 1890 is altered to make the changes manditory we may never be free of dead presidents and possibly the SAME dead presidents.
6 - Let the artists work show, slow down the mint presses, reaise the relief and return to multi-strike hubbing
I'm not sure about the multi-hubbing, but if the relief is raised it would probably be required. It has been said that we can't slow down the presses because of the requirements of the coin production for commerce. But elimination of the cent would free up HALF of the mints production capacity. This would allow this now surplus capacity to be used for other coins and the speed of the presses could be cut in half and still produce the same number of coins as are currently struck. The slower speeds would then allow for a return to higher relief.
7 - A suggestion for the Commems, Mint state and PROOF specimins should be struck at different mints
I believe this is already the case.
PROOFS could be struck in higher relief-considerably so. Give collectors a choice of brilliant or matte surfaces.
New collectors, please educate yourself before spending money on coins; there are people who believe that using numismatic knowledge to rip the naïve is what this hobby is all about.
<< <i>If they implemented 1,2,3,4 and 6, how would we tell the difference between classics and moderns? >>
If they implemented those would we care about classics VS moderns?
If you really wanted to tell the difference how about by date?
<< <i>If they implemented 1,2,3,4 and 6, how would we tell the difference between classics and moderns?
Well, I for one might develop an interest in collecting moderns if they did those things...
<< <i>Even if you can get past the politics which for some reason has dominated the coin designs for the past 75 years, there is no way you can implement any change that will slow down the minting process. We as collectors would love the raised relief, but it is not going to happen.
>>
Politics has always been the biggest determinant of US coin design. Most of
what appears on a coin has always been mandated by law. Even the basic design
has often come out of Washington. Really little has changed in this regard other
than the politics and the politicians.
Reeding now serves the purpose of helping the visually impared indentify which coin is which.
LOL