Modern Uncirculated Mint Sets: when did this procedure start?
PocketArt
Posts: 1,335 ✭✭✭✭✭
I signed up to get the 2017 Uncirculated Mint Set that will be released on 5/17/2017 through the US Mint website. Thought it would be cool to have a set, along with the "P" Lincoln Cent. I never purchased a modern mint set from the US Mint, let alone bothered to read the description...Interestingly, I read this:
_"U.S. Mint uncirculated coins are struck on special presses using greater force than what is used for circulating coins, producing a sharp, intricately detailed image. The coins are sealed in blisters and displayed in folders." _
Okay, I never new the uncirculated coins in the US Mint sets were struck differently, that is on "special presses," and "using greater force," than normal uncirculated business strikes. I was aware of the Satin Finish coins from 2005-2010; but what about US Mint set coins produced later?
Questions; how long has this process been going on with US mint sets, and also, wouldn't a MS68 business struck coin for circulation be much more rare than a MS68 US Mint set example? Should it be necessary to differentiate between the two on TPG slab?
Comments
I believe it started in 2005
Satin finish , I believe started in '05. Maybe it was '07 ? They caused more confusion among collectors perhaps, but they're great looking. And of course there is a pricing difference as that goes, too. Those higher graded business strikes are tough to find.
Satin Finish was 2005-2010.
As for the current mint set coins vs. other business strike coins, I can't tell a huge difference. A lot of the coins I've found in rolls have been much better than some of the ones in mint sets and vice versa.
The percentage of nicer coins in the mint set is higher, but you won't be able to readily identify the source (rolls vs. mint set) by looking at the coins.
I don't anticipate there ever being a premium over a "mint set" sourced coin unless they bring back Satin Finish.
1965.
Be happy that the mint is now making an effort to make these coins special. Back in the 1970s and '80s, the coins sometimes looked like they had been run over with track shoes, swept off the floor and mounted into the mint packages. In other words many of them were terrible.
It may be then wise to keep these modern US Mint Sets intact if the only way to definitively distinguish one from a normal uncirculated business strike is from the packaging. If the mint still struck these on "special presses," while "using greater force," than it did on business strikes post 2010; then they were at least intended to be special, even though they lack the satin finish?
It appears the mintage of these sets are fairly low compared to proof sets- here is data from 2011 through 2015. Source is from CoinNewsNet 1/6/17 by Mike Unser.
Clad Proof Sets
2011- 1,098,835
2012- 794,002
2013- 802,460
2014- 714,661
2015- 662,909
US Mint Sets
2011- 533,529
2012- 392,224
2013- 376,844
2014- 345,813
2015- 314,048
Any long-term collectible value of these post 2010 special struck US mint sets? Do you think they'll ever rise above issue price in the next decade?
Far too complicated. Used to be there were proofs and business strikes....
Here's a warning parable for coin collectors...
The problem hasn't changed one iota; Almost nobody collects moderns. Even the tiniest mintages swamp the demand. Even though nicely made and pristine examples appear in mint sets since 1965 people don't care. Even where only 1% of a coin is nice, people don't care.
Now days they make large percentages of the mint set coins nice and they aren't marked up as much as the older mint set coins but there are very very few collectors. Don't forget that now days the coins made for circulation are much nicer today and now days large numbers of these are being set aside. The nicest coins made for circulation are comparable to those in mint sets and have been since 1965. It's just finding nice coins in circulation was virtually impossible until this century. They were out there but you'd have to look through countless thousands of inferior coins to find them. Nobody saved rolls to check so you could only get the current couple of years to search.
Think of it this way; there were a couple million 1969 quarters put in mint sets and these were far superior in strike to circulation issues because they were struck under higher pressure from brand new dies. But they were almost all garbage with only about 8% of them grading nice chBU (MS-64) or higher. Now days these are almost all gone lost to the ravages of time and the cheap defective plastic used by the mint. There are only a few thousand left but there is no demand so why would a modern mintage with 300,000 nice Gems get much more interest?
Everybody believes these coins are all too common to collect so very few do.
This is a similar phenomenon to moderns from all over the world. After WWII one country after another removed silver from circulation and now the values of the base metal coins that replaced them are soaring because they weren't saved. Even though there's little demand the supply is even smaller.
Perhaps this will never happen in the US simply because of mint sets. There will always be a supply of nice older coins in mint sets even if many dates are corroded.
Thanks cladking for the informative response- puts the present reality into perspective. You know, it's quite depressing, sad, bullstein, whatever...If this trend keeps up we'll be looking at proof set / mint set mintage's back down in the single / tens of thousand range...
Last coin club meeting I was at- I managed to pick up (2) '68 and (2) '69 mint sets, all four for $10 in auction. No demand. Some nice coins in the four sets; but, like you mentioned the plastic has clouded some of the halves, quarters, and there's some funky brownish/black residue, looks like faint dried up cola on the surface of some coins. May I ask what you use to get that cloudiness, and funky cola stains off the coins? Can they be saved?
Thank you,
Rich
Only some can be saved.
The worst are '69, '71, '68, then '70 but all of them have problems. After '84 the sets are much better at least at the current time. Who knows what they'll be like in ten or 20 years though.
A prolonged soak in 91% isopropyl alcohol seems pretty effective when they can be fixed. A little acetone with it seems to help. After a few long soaks I usually give up but there's always a 1/4 tspn of industrial grade ammonia in a cup of water. If this doesn't work then make the solution much stronger and it will remove it but the coin appears "cleaned".
Even coins that were well stored are often destroyed if they were left in the mint set packaging. They should have been removed and quickly rinsed in alcohol many years ago. Some coins, like '68-P cents are nearly universally destroyed. Nobody seems to notice because so few are collecting these coins and now it's too late for many of them. There just aren't going to be many Gems of a lot of moderns because of collectors ignoring the coins and bad mint set packaging.
Yes, I'd agree with your order of mint sets with problems- my '69's are the worst. Thanks for the insight on what you have used to clean up some of these.
Started in 2011. Today's Uncirculated Mint set coins are also struck on specially prepared planchets. They go through a cleaning process informally known as "spalecking" (after the name of the German machinery used).
Actually the first year the mint admitted the mint set coins were different was 1997. Ironically many of the coins in '96 mint sets look almost like branch mint proofs yet it was '97 before they changed the terminology.
Up until that time they had said the coins were made by the same processes as regular mint coins but this was a confusion since they've used new dies and higher pressure since '65. They also used the old presses or proof set presses ('65-'67) during this entire time.
There was very little information available about mint sets until more recent times. There are still some aspects that haven't been published so far as I know.
Mint set quality is not widely known because the coins aren't widely collected. These coins aren't really "different" than coins made for circulation but the processes used assure that many of the coins will be far higher quality than standard issues. Most moderns were poorly struck from worn, tired, and badly aligned dies but the higher force and lower speeds give details time to fill in where they rarely do with standard issues. Dies are swapped out after a mere 30,000 strikes on average from mint set presses while the high speed presses can strike over a million coins. Planchets are sometimes better and sometimes polished or partially polished. Even the dies sometimes get extra treatment including basining. These things just aren't known because nobody looks at moderns and even finding older rolls can be a challenge. Since most mint set coins are banged up some people will look no further. Despite years of searching Gems I didn't even know there were any Gem Ikes until 1978 when I found a Gem '77-D in a mint set. While coins in sets are tyically well made they are often atrocious quality due to contact with equipment and other coins. As a rule true Gems are tough in mint sets and virtually impossible from rolls. Since rolls are scarce it little matters anyway.
I glanced at my records hoping to find the first mint mention of mint set quality from 1997 but found this first;
From Numismatic News 6/ 26/ '01 pg 41.,= "Uncireculated coins are not merely new coins. They are minted on special presses and are struck with greater force than circulating coins - producing a sharp , intricately detailed image." An order form for '01 mint sets is included in the full page ad @ 14.95 / and $3.95 S & H per order.
The mint had always called these coins to be the same quality as other coins but the statements were highly misleading and those few who sought high quality coins were mostly looking in mint sets. Each year, mint, and denomination varied and they didn't always vary in tandem with the coins made for circulation.
Anyone who thinks they can get nice attractive well made '82 and '83 cu/ ni is being misled by grading services that don't account for strike and die quality and price guides that simply don't know nice well made coins bring significant premiums on eBay even in lower grade. Well made '82 coins are tough and clean '83 coins are just as tough.
Thanks for all the information cladking.... I learned a lot here today... Cheers, RickO
You're welcome.
I don't want to leave anyone with the impression that every modern Gem originated in mint sets or that one can form any modern collection from mint sets alone. Not only do some coins not appear in mint sets but some Gems are excessively tough in sets. Most varieties don't appear in mint sets and those which do are pretty "common" relative to the demand. I find it ironic that a sm dt '70-S cent which appears in 10% of the sets is far more valuable than the Gem '70-S cent that appears in about 4% of sets.
Collecting moderns requires one to seek coins from varied sources but for most dates the nicest coins will be mint set. This goes many times over if you are seeking beautiful well made coins from new dies that are properly aligned. Most "Gems" from BU rolls will not be razor sharp and fully struck. Most Gems in mint sets are.
True Gems of dates and varieties that don't appear in mint sets are rare. Most are scarce even in chBU.
These facts are not easily seen because there is little demand, services "grade on the curve", and price guides reflect grading services more than the real market. Not only is the demand very weak but much of it is from new collectors who are gaining sophistication. Many of these collectors won't purchase rare coins because the price guides list them at such low values that they won't bid enough to actually gain the coin.
@cladking.... There was a set in the late '90's I believe, that had a mint mark 'erased' from the die on the cent.... but evidence was left in the form of die scuffs...I know I have that set somewhere.... Do you recall which one that was? Thanks, Cheers, RickO
Picked up all the chemicals at neighborhood friendly Walmart today. Just curious cladking, how long are your long soaks with the 91% isopopyl alcohol?
Also, thanks again for the informative posts. I've bought several late '60's and early to mid '70's mint sets. They are cheep enough. Some real nice gems in some of them!
rich
After four or five days it seems the percentage that are OK quits rising. Most of the ones that are saved will be saved in the first 24 hours or so.
A few of the coins are simply spectacular. As a rule about 2% will be Gem but this is highly variable and will include a slightly different definition of "Gem". Some coins like '72-D quarters are typically very choice with about 8% Gems and others like the '76 tI Ike are only about .3% (3 / 1,000) Gems and most of the rest look like junk.
My favorites now days are extremely early die state from the first ten strikes or so. It's something of an acquired taste though.
many people snatch up the mint sets to break out 1 or 2 of the coins to get graded. I have 1958-2016 with a few missing and some 2 or 3 sets, I buy duplicates so I can look at one and then keep one sealed in the box mark it of what is inside set aside. The ones I buy online I have found some great toning coins but have not opened or broken them out just left as is.
@RickO question to you is what is the deal about people selling "sealed old envelopes" then I see people selling just envelopes. Are they trying to get premium on stuff they already looked at? I was sick to my stomach when I seen envelopes for sale. for example in 1958,1965 SS when these sets had been received would the envelope have been sealed closed or left open?
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
@Kkathyl ....I have heard it both ways... some say sealed, some say opened... all the sets I have purchased were open.... no sign of them ever being sealed. I have purchased multiple '64 sets with AH Kennedy's, all were open. Cheers, RickO
I've opened a lot of boxes of '65 SMS and they were not sealed.