Why don't we see higher grades in Business strikes compared to Proof strikes?

YaHa

It seems earlier strikes in all business type coins since the Morgans to the Kens on to the linky's that had some 68/69's grades, maybe a few 70's but do recall or seen a 70.. But, my theory is the reason is the bulk striking and the careless handling as such..


So, coins today in business strikes, why do suspect the reasoning in no high grades pass the norm of MS 67? Thanks Yaha

Bcsican

Simple answer the minting process and handling of the coins...

Free

Business strike coins go through quite a rough ride after they are hammered. I've seen shows on the minting of circulating coins and it's a wonder that they come out as good as they do at the end of their ride. I've never seen the proof minting process, but I would assume that these are hammered in much less numbers and handled a bit differently than business strikes.

cladking

There's something that can go wrong at each stage of the minting process and
it usually does. This is really no exaggeration since most coins are not perfect in
any of their characteristics.

It starts with the master dies and hubs. The dies wear and often don't contain the
full detail for the issue so no coin struck that year can be perfect. Eventually the de-
sign is impressed into the working dies and this will often be far less than perfect so
many or most of the dies are bad. Then the dies get installed in a press that isn't
fastened down properly and there will be mechanical strike doubling on most of the
output. The die won't be set squarely to the reverse die so half the coin isn't struck
up properly. And, of course, die wear starts showing after only a dozen strikes and
after 30,000 strikes becomes distracting. The die will go on to strike up to another
million coins. Dies have to be spaced perfectly to get the proper strike pressure so
the design can fill out.

These are struck on planchets which are intentionally roughed up so the automatic eq-
uipment have a littlke better hold on them. It requires a near perfect strike to totally
obliterate the planchet markings.

Then it really gets tough for the coins. Once they leave the dies they can even be
scratched as they leave the coining chamber. Most of the finest '88-D dimes have an
ugly gouge right in front of the portrait which could only have happened on the way
out of the coining chamber.

Coins go by conveyor into hoppers and if the level in the hopper is low the coin falls
so far that its velocity is likely to result in a mark. Even if the hopper is full more coins
can land on top or it can be scratched being drawn off the bottom. The coins are bag-
ged and then they have to run the gauntlet again to get to a wrapped roll.

It's a wonder that any coins survive in high grade. Even mint set coins are washed
and then tumble dried. Some of the packaging equipment has even caused trouble;
more than 99% of '80-D half dollars have shallow scratches caused by this equipment.

If every individual involved with the production of a coin did his job properly whether
by design or accident there's a fair chance that the coin will be a gem. Otherwise the
odds are very very poor.

MS-67's are long shots. This was especially true prior to 1999. In those days there
was nearly no customer demand whatsoever for the mint to turn out quality. It was
a matter of just trying to maintain a minimum standard that preoccupied the mint and
there was no real concern for average quality or best quality. This was really true for
mint set coins as well though they did put a lot more effort to try to maintain the best
possible quality. It's not always easy to tell but at least the strikes and dies were usu-
ally good.

Now days they'll hear about it when any quality is poor so they do better. The early
clad years often resulted in simply attrocious coinage.


And now it's mostly heavily worn.

YaHa

<< <i>There's something that can go wrong at each stage of the minting process and
it usually does. This is really no exaggeration since most coins are not perfect in
any of their characteristics.

It starts with the master dies and hubs. The dies wear and often don't contain the
full detail for the issue so no coin struck that year can be perfect. Eventually the de-
sign is impressed into the working dies and this will often be far less than perfect so
many or most of the dies are bad. Then the dies get installed in a press that isn't
fastened down properly and there will be mechanical strike doubling on most of the
output. The die won't be set squarely to the reverse die so half the coin isn't struck
up properly. And, of course, die wear starts showing after only a dozen strikes and
after 30,000 strikes becomes distracting. The die will go on to strike up to another
million coins. Dies have to be spaced perfectly to get the proper strike pressure so
the design can fill out.

These are struck on planchets which are intentionally roughed up so the automatic eq-
uipment have a littlke better hold on them. It requires a near perfect strike to totally
obliterate the planchet markings.

Then it really gets tough for the coins. Once they leave the dies they can even be
scratched as they leave the coining chamber. Most of the finest '88-D dimes have an
ugly gouge right in front of the portrait which could only have happened on the way
out of the coining chamber.

Coins go by conveyor into hoppers and if the level in the hopper is low the coin falls
so far that its velocity is likely to result in a mark. Even if the hopper is full more coins
can land on top or it can be scratched being drawn off the bottom. The coins are bag-
ged and then they have to run the gauntlet again to get to a wrapped roll.

It's a wonder that any coins survive in high grade. Even mint set coins are washed
and then tumble dried. Some of the packaging equipment has even caused trouble;
more than 99% of '80-D half dollars have shallow scratches caused by this equipment.

If every individual involved with the production of a coin did his job properly whether
by design or accident there's a fair chance that the coin will be a gem. Otherwise the
odds are very very poor.

MS-67's are long shots. This was especially true prior to 1999. In those days there
was nearly no customer demand whatsoever for the mint to turn out quality. It was
a matter of just trying to maintain a minimum standard that preoccupied the mint and
there was no real concern for average quality or best quality. This was really true for
mint set coins as well though they did put a lot more effort to try to maintain the best
possible quality. It's not always easy to tell but at least the strikes and dies were usu-
ally good.

Now days they'll hear about it when any quality is poor so they do better. The early
clad years often resulted in simply attrocious coinage.


And now it's mostly heavily worn. >>




Damn... That's why you are the king.. I couldn't said it better.. Thanks..