Research into Gould and INCO Private Medalic Patterns – Collector Input Wanted
RogerB
Posts: 8,852 ✭✭✭✭✭
As part of a long-term plan related to United States Pattern and Experimental pieces, a project has begun to describe and catalog all known varieties of the medalic private patterns made by Gould, Inc. and International Nickel Corp. (INCO). As some are aware, these companies prepared private pieces for the use of Congress and the Mint during consideration of various alloy changes in 1964-65 and 1976-78.
[Photo from PCGS Coinfacts.]
The goal is to lift the veil of confusion and inaccuracy surrounding these pieces, and to tell – as accurately and completely as possible – the story of their creation and use. (The prototype for this research is the book Pattern and Experimental Pieces of WW-II.)
The final product will be a printed booklet devoted to this subject – there’s likely not enough material extant to create a book-length treatment.
Information about pieces made by Gould and INCO, photos, documents, and especially direct knowledge or company reports, will be highly appreciated and appropriately acknowledged at publication.
Comments
No info as yet.
Message sent.
I will PM you soon.
Roger, & Mike,
Roger, and Mike W.
I forget I had this, and just found it in a corner of my office.
(I bought it about 20-25 years ago at a coin show)
It's a 7 inch long, 3 inch high, 3/4 inch thick piece of clear plastic.
In it are 6 items from Inco, as follows: (appears to be a set of progessive planchets, etc.)
A Clad "quarter' Blank w/copper core, hand-scratched on it "Item 1"
Same as above, but the edge appears to be buffed or ? much brighter copper core -
Hand-scratched on it "Item II"
Same as above, but with a fairly deep groove on the edge, possibly to show the
copper core better? Hand-Scratched on it "Item III"
Quarter size blank, no copper core (does not look plated), Hand-scratched "Item IV"
A struck INCO test piece, with "International Nickel Company Inc. Dedicated 1964" with
their corporate offices/building on one side, and "Paul D. Merica Laboratory" and his
portrait, and "Item V" scratched into it.
A Clad 'quarter' planchet with a very strange wide upset rim, and Hand-scratched "Item VI"
With it, but separate, is a 38 mm/1.5 inch struck INCO Medal with "50 Years of Inco Research
1924-1974, and "International Nickel Company, Inc" and their building, on the other side.
I haven't checked my Pattern files yet to see if I have any old articles about them, but I'd be
glad to ship these items to you for your research.
Fred,
That would be great to include. Things like this can add a lot to telling the complete story of these privately made pieces.
Roger,
You have my email address.
Please send me your address, and I'll be glad to mail
the plastic set and larger medal to you for your research.
Keep them as long as you need........
Fred
OK. Thanks a bunch!
A little background on these kinds of "private patterns."
Since the 1870s, the Mint and Treasury dept have engaged outside individuals and companies to comment or test proposed coinage. A. Loudoun Snowden provided extensive comments on Morgan's dollar design in 1877 and 1878; Hobbs Mfg. Corp. complained about the Buffalo nickel to the point of delaying its introduction from September 1912 to Feb. 1913; AT&T was solicited to test new design dimes in their pay telephones in August 1916 with the result that the entire first production was condemned and the design revised. (These are described in the books Renaissance of American Coinage 1909-1915, and Renaissance of American Coinage 1916-1921.)
As use of coin operated machines increased the Mint was under considerable pressure to accommodate vending machine manufacturers. The WW-II nickel alloy was the direct result of vending industry claims that a 50-50 AgCu nickel wouldn't work in their new machines. When Treasury wanted to replace silver in coinage in 1964, they decided to look for something that created as little disruption for vending machines and pay telephones as possible. Hence, INCO and others proposed coinage metals and various metals were tested. Something similar happened when the change to a small size dollar coin was proposed in 1976 resulting in the Gould, Inc. pieces made with powdered metal technology.
Thanks for the information Roger. I imagine that significant changes to coinage can create all sorts of issues, both within the mint and in other business venues (i.e. vending machines). I notice now that cash registers no longer seem to have slots for half dollars... well, some of them don't.... I guess since they rarely circulate, the register companies have noted and instituted modifications. Cheers, RickO
@RogerB
I recently picked up a cent-sized possible Gould pattern from exo on the bay which was auctioned with a dollar planchet and a few other Gould pieces of his. I'm not sure if he has more pieces. I also have one of the 1964 INCO experimental alloy pieces. Mine is similar to the photo from USPatterns.com but isn't etched. I used it as one of my previous avatars here.
Here are exo's photos from the bay for the cent-sized piece and planchet. Is exo a member here?
Gould possible cent
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Possible-Pattern-Cent-Gould-Incorporated-Logo-Pollock-Unlisted-/382093639591
Gould dollar planchet - I was the underbidder on this
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Pattern-Coin-Blank-Gould-Incorporated-Dollar-Blank-Pollock-Unlisted-/352064610504
1964 INCO experimental alloy piece from USPatterns.com - mine is similar but unetched
http://uspatterns.stores.yahoo.net/p5195.html
If the Gould cent-sized piece and the INCO piece would be useful for your research, I can mail them to you.
Thanks!
if you can take accurate weight (grams), diameter and thickness (mm) that will be very helpful. I've copied the photos posted above. The one-cent size logo pieces should be approximately 2.25g, 19mm dia, and 2.24mm thick (incl the logo). A photo of your INCO test piece might also be useful.
I just noticed the seller had posted some information in the catalog for the cent-sized logo piece:
Cent-sized logo piece:
Blank planchet:
I'm working on getting the ability to do proper measurements myself.
This is likely too much but hopefully it will be useful. This is how I measure coins sent to me for evaluation. Photos of all three sides are also made.
First, visit a large art supply store and buy a 1/2-inch high quality sable brush. Use this to gently brush the surfaces of items before you weigh and measure them. Never blow on them. If you want to use pressurized air in place of the brush, make sure it is 100% free of moisture. Always wash and dry your hands before starting measurements. At this level of accuracy skin coin transferred to the coin can be measured; also, oil will contaminate the edge of the coin.
A good goal is to have a digital scale with accurate readout to 0.001 gram, one-button calibration and auto "tare" function; and digital calipers measuring to 0.01 mm with reset/calibration function. Dense nylon or steel external jaws. (Some devices measure to 0.001 but display only 0.01. Use the same procedures for all.)
Procedure is simple but a little tedious: Measure weight with the scale on a firm, level surface away from drafts or obvious vibrations. For weight, cut a slip of paper slightly larger than the coins you want to measure. Turn up one edge and place this slip o the scale. Press the 'tare' button - this will 'zero' the scale with the paper in place. gently drop the coin flat onto the paper (never direct onto the scale). Do not touch the scale or table. Allow the weight to stabilize, then record the full readout value. Repeat 10 times.
For diameter place the coin on a smooth, non-abrasive surface (piece of mylar is good). Open the caliper jaws a little wider than the coin diameter. Tilt the jaws at about a 45-degree angle. Using the tips of the caliper jaws, measure the diameter from 6:00 to 12:00 o'clock. Repeat 10 times. Do the same from 3:00 to 9:00 o'clock. (Why diagonal? Some calipers have a very narrow jaw edge that can fit between the reeds on a coin, thus giving misleading measurements. Also be aware that sometimes the caliper jaw edge will span two raised reeds. Averaging measurement will help obviate this error. Legal diameter of reeded edge coins are from the top of reeding on the edge. Thickness is from rim-to-rim.)
For thickness, support the coin in its edge between two slips of mylar. Measure the thickness at the rim at the 6:00 or 12:00 position. Again, use 10 measurements; then repeat at either 3:00 or 9:00 o'clock.
To obtain a reliable mean for all measurements, put your data into columns in Excel or some other good spreadsheet. Next, remove the greatest and least values - i.e. highest and lowest. This will leave 8 data points for each set of measurements. All each column of 8 measurements and divide by 8. This will be the mean (or average) value for each of the physical characteristics. Last, Round all 3-decimal values to two decimal places, This helps correct for unavoidable inconsistencies in measurement and internal calculations in the scale and calipers. (Even your own breath, or air moved by your hand can result in false data at this level of measurement.)
I know this sounds like a lot to do - and it is. But the rewards are reliable measurements that pass the test of time and validation by others.
I also remeasure any data set that has variations greater than +/-0.03.
A minor bump in case new info is floating about.
Interestingly, I've examined pieces that are identical in appearance, diameter and thickness, yet differ by 50% in density. These will require deeper testing.
Getting to the difficult part of research now. Have identified some pieces in molybdenum and zirconium. Almost the only thing they didn't test was the kitchen sink -- oops.....stainless steel pieces, too.
Anything come up in the past week from members?
Posting some additional information to this thread since this is the one Google finds the most easily!
Thanks to Roger @RogerB and Julian @therealjulian for doing research in this area which was both used for the book and sold recently by Heritage. I wish the pieces had the Burdette / Leidman provenance on the slabs and/or lot descriptions, but we'll need to use the auction history for now. Hopefully definitive list of the B-L coins can be made one day!
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1065348/modern-patterns#latest
These are all certified by NGC using Roger's new RB numbers.
Does anyone know if PCGS will certify these?
1964 Half Dollar Pattern - by INCO - NGC NGC MS66 POP 0/2/0 - RB 2700 - Ex. Roger W. Burdette & Julian Leidman
Here's a nice 50 cent pattern from the collection. The half dollar sized coins seem fairly rare with only 2 present while there were many more quarter sized pieces.
What does the "101-12" signify?
FWIW, my INCO Paul D. Merica half dollar has the same rotated reverse, but nothing in the field.
I’m not sure yet. Roger would say buy the book of course! And I would love to, but in electronic form. I asked Roger to publish in PDF or Kindle but he’s not ready to do that yet.
The book just says “This might be a test batch number.”
By the way, great piece! I'll have to keep an eye out for a non-engraved one too!
I haven't decided if being engraved or not is better from a collection pespective. I think both have their allure so right now I think it's good to have one of each!
Wow Tom! I didn't realize how central you are to these pieces!
Here's a description of the book: