Options
Mint set vs. Buisness strike grading
ClosedLoop
Posts: 1,077 ✭✭✭
Do any of the grading services put these designations
on their slabs? ( except for the 2005-2010)
How can they tell the difference?
The mint states the striking pressure is increased for the mint sets
this would make a true buisnsess strike coin more rare in higher grades.
just wondering.
on their slabs? ( except for the 2005-2010)
How can they tell the difference?
The mint states the striking pressure is increased for the mint sets
this would make a true buisnsess strike coin more rare in higher grades.
just wondering.
figglehorn
0
Comments
1997 SMS
just wondering.>
And why do you think that?
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
<< <i>1966 SMS
1997 SMS >>
For the 1997 SMS.....In the, Item specifics.....everything is there but the mintage.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
more clear in my title. mint sets not sms.
are mint set coins handled the same way as
buisness coins?
Hoard the keys.
The mint set coins are often better quality, high rims, less bag marks, better finish.
It's pretty tough to find examples as nice in OBWs.
mint set coins and buisness strike are two different coins.
yet, they are all sold as buisness strike.
<< <i>This is my point exactly.
mint set coins and buisness strike are two different coins.
yet, they are all sold as buisness strike. >>
I do agree but....
If I took 50 mint set coins (lets say cents from 1992) and mixed them with 50 coins from a 1992 OBW, I could sort them out latter and be correct.
I think the problem is that for a TPG it's hard to delineate on a case by case basis, can they be sure that the one high grade coin that someone picked from an OBW was not from a mint set? I'm not sure there is a good enough or easy enough to use criteria that would always work 100% of the time for all cases.
People picked coins from OBWs (from years where mint sets were SF) and when the coins were graded sometimes they came back as SF even though they were bus strikes. (because some bus strikes are SF)
I heard of coins being graded that were not marked as SF but they really were from SF mint sets. I think it's a similar thing, we can tell MOST of the time but sometimes the bus strike coin is hard to 100% prove it's not from a mint set be it SF or regular.
Similar to MPL Lincolns, sometimes it's hard to tell but they can use known die pairs to help but with modern mint sets there are many more die pairs used so even that won't work.
that the Mint Set coins are an intended higher quality with special attention given to them is a Numismatic Urban Myth perpetuated here. it is simply that the Mint Set coins are more readily available and that a collector can attend a show and search those sets for free, but if that same collector wanted to search a roll of the same date/mm at that same show he'd have to buy it. my "anecdotal evidence" points to a simple conclusion: the same poor quality of Mint issues is available in either a Mint Set, bag or roll of coins.
I'm basing this on cents only because I deal more with them than other denominations. I don't know of a reference that says what they did. It may be a one way thing, meaning that there's no guarantee that all the coins NOT in mint sets won't be high quality so you might find gems in normal bags or rolls.
If you have a bunch of zinc cents (may not be true before zinc cents) from the 80s-90s try dumping out some OBW rolls and toss in a dozen cents from mint sets and mix them up.
With near certainty you can pick out those mint set coins by the finish and get back the same dozen coins. If you tube them and look at only the rims in the tubes, again you can pick out the same dozen coins by the high shinny rims. It seems definitive enough that if you try that the odds are very slim that you'll find a cent with the similar qualities and end up with a coin that wasn't one you put in the group from the mint sets.
Try it with one coin, put a cent from a mint set in a tube of others and look at the rim edge, you will see that coin stands out from the others.
I'm not saying that among millions of rolls/bags there won't be a gem but for all practical purposes if you try an experiment like that you'll be able to tell the mint set coins apart from the others. That's why I say it would be hard for a TPG to delineate between a one in a million gem from a regular bag/roll. But still, the mint set zinc cents are in general better quality (better finish, better plating, higher rims) from what I've seen.
LOL, try it and see
Well, just Love coins, period.
mint set coins as "regular production issue" or similar terms and despite the fact mint set coins
are struck on numismatic presses, at lower speeds, under higher pressure, and by new dies
and then the coins are specially washed and dried.
Essentially the mint simply recognized two methods of manufacture; mint and proof and the
mint set coins aren't proofs even if a few can pass as proof. In a very real way they used the
correct terminology because you can't tell a coin was struck under higher pressure or at lower
speeds so it looks like any other coins. You can't tell a new die on the coining floor from a new
die in a mint set press. All of the "enhancements" were invisible in the finished product except
that it resulted in the vast majority of mint set coins being superior to the vast majority of the
regular issues.
It oiften doesn't really matter anyway since a lot of the clad coins don't exist in rolls anyway
because no one ever saved them. Mint set coins got a lot of marking in the processes so if you
want clean coins sometimes you're better off looking for rolls. But there's no question mint
set coins are better made by better dies on average than other coins. Finding Gems in circu-
lation can be exceedingly difficult but finding Gems in mint sets is like shooting fish in a barrel.
Some Gems in mint sets can be as scarce as .2% but there are quite a few circulation issues that
I've never found in Gem despite looking at thousands of examples.
If you want clean coins then most have to be found in sets. There are specific coins where you're
better off looking in rolls. But if you want well struck coins made by new dies there is no alterna-
tive to the mint sets.
Although the double mint sets from the late '40 and '50s through 1958 have a high reputation, some coins in those sets were not so hot. I remember seeing a 1954 set that had nickels in it that were totally flat struck on the reverse.
production number totals.
<< <i>are mint set coins included in the final
production number totals. >>
Yes, up until 1999. Since then they have been counted separately.
Souvenir sets were included in the totals as well.
Good question.
<< <i>I have been out of the mint set game for a long while, but I can tell you that there periods in the 1970s and '80s when the quality of the coins that came in mint sets was very poor. I remember seeing coins in mint sets in the mid to late that were so bad that made you wonder why you spent the money for them. You could gone down to the bank, got some rolls and done better.
Although the double mint sets from the late '40 and '50s through 1958 have a high reputation, some coins in those sets were not so hot. I remember seeing a 1954 set that had nickels in it that were totally flat struck on the reverse. >>
A lot of these coins are garbage, no question about it. Perhaps one of the worst is
the '80-D half dollar. They can be very gemmy but they all have shallow scratches
on the reverse except a few that have them on the obverse or both. Only a little more
than 1% lack the scratches and most of these tend poorly struck.
But what differentiates the mint set coins especially before the relief was lowered so
much that most coins got a decent strike is that mint set coins are very well made.
I could look through bags and rolls of some dates and not find a decently made coin
at all. Usually the well made coins in rolls were scratched. Yes, there could be a lot
less marking on coins you found at the bank and this wasn't extremely unusual be-
cause mint set coins could be terrible.
But pretty much even the worst dates appear as Gems in the mint set. Try finding a
nice gemmy '79-D cent and you might give up in exasperation after looking at a few
dozen mint sets but if you keep plodding along you'll probably find one after 125 sets
or so. The rest will mostly look fairly nice except for gouges and large scratches. But
if you look through rolls you'll find plenty of Gems but almost every one you find in
rolls will be poorly struck, poorly centered, and struck from worn dies.
I spent a lot of time and effort trying to find good sources for rolls and bags and did
set aside Gems from these sources as I got lucky. But it was a lot of work and there
wasn't always a reward. In mint sets there is always a reward. Two sets out of three
will have at least one gemmy coin or true Gem. With effort most dates can even be
found with all Gems. I remember the old letters to the editor where people would gripe
about the horrible quality of the current set and the letter would appear adjacent to
another letter lauding the mint for the wonderful quality. They were both right! Every
year they make a few horrible sets and a few spectacular sets and most are somewhere
in the middle. Sometimes they tend toward terrible and sometimes they tend toward
superb. From '73 to '85 they tended toward terrible but there were Gems of every sin-
gle one of these coins. Sometimes they were fairly common and sometimes they were
very elusive.
<< <i>
A lot of these coins are garbage, no question about it. Perhaps one of the worst is
the '80-D half dollar. They can be very gemmy but they all have shallow scratches
on the reverse except a few that have them on the obverse or both. Only a little more
than 1% lack the scratches and most of these tend poorly
>>
The 81-D half is also gemmy with many appearing proof like. Unfortunately, a large number of these have major scuffing of Kennedy's cheek.
My Jefferson Registry:
https://pcgs.com/setregistry/alltimeset/191115
<< <i>
The 81-D half is also gemmy with many appearing proof like. Unfortunately, a large number of these have major scuffing of Kennedy's cheek. >>
Indeed. And then the '81-P tends to have ugly surfaces.
Clean shields on the Kennedy reverse is tough. Even "easy' dates tend to have marking here.
produce a mint set? and
did the mint ever use circulation (buisness) strike
coins in the mint set?
<< <i>when did the mint start using special presses or increase striking pressure to
produce a mint set? and
did the mint ever use circulation (buisness) strike
coins in the mint set? >>
The Mint set coins from the past few years are nicer than coins found in rolls generally but the differences would not be enough to justify any special notation. I hunt high grade moderns and have found superb gems in both bank rolls and Mint sets. Nobody really cares where the top pop coins come from. Since the Mint quit making the Satin finish coins in 2010 you really can't tell the difference between so-called Mint set coins and coins found at Banks ie., what I believe you are calling Business strikes. Anything not a Proof is a Business strike in my book.
<< <i>when did the mint start using special presses or increase striking pressure to
produce a mint set? and >>
1965. The proof coinage presses from Phily were shipped to San Francisco for SMS production.
Most of the changes used for the SMS's were carried over to mint set production in 1968. The big-
gest change was a decrease in die preparation in '68 sets. There are differences between years
and there are a few anomalies within years. I've seen '66 quarters that appear to be fully proof
(not frosted) and '88-D cents that look like branch mint proofs. It's even possible to find worn die
strikes in the sets but these are probably dies that wore unusually fast.
<< <i>did the mint ever use circulation (buisness) strike
coins in the mint set? >>
I doubt it.
They did use regular production coins for souvenir sets though and the '87 halfs in souvenir sets
are probably mint set quality.
<< <i> Anything not a Proof is a Business strike in my book. >>
Do you believe this is true for '70's and '80's clad? ie- that they are the same.
when did the mint stop using pvc for mint set production?
<< <i>maybe i should have been a little
more clear in my title. mint sets not sms.
are mint set coins handled the same way as
buisness coins? >>
Yes.
Mint Set coins have always been favored for their quality of strike.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>
<< <i> Anything not a Proof is a Business strike in my book. >>
Do you believe this is true for '70's and '80's clad? ie- that they are the same. >>
I am only speaking of post 2010 SF coins.
<< <i>i'm sorry, one more question.
when did the mint stop using pvc for mint set production? >>
'84 appears to be the last PVC for regular mint set packaging.
<< <i>
<< <i>i'm sorry, one more question.
when did the mint stop using pvc for mint set production? >>
'84 appears to be the last PVC for regular mint set packaging. >>
This is the first I've heard of this and I have uncirculated sets prior to 1984 that say PVC was not used.
The name is LEE!
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
<< <i>
'84 appears to be the last PVC for regular mint set packaging. >>
This is the first I've heard of this and I have uncirculated sets prior to 1984 that say PVC was not used. >>
A flame test suggests PVC. Whatever it is it looks like a soft plastic layer on the
inside of both sheets of plastic that form the pliocene packet. These appear to ac-
tually be four layers of plastic bonded together. These interior layers are extremely
thin.
Singles from the original roll groups appeared to be later die strikes as they were not flashy, but rather drab, lack-luster. Perhaps the first strikes went into the 1975 mint sets.
<< <i>Regarding 1976-P Type 1 Ike dollars (where about half of the mintage went into 1975 mint sets) I can tell a difference in the look of mint set examples vs. those from original rolls that went into normal commerce channels. I have bought two groups of original rolls of 76 Type 1 Ikes over the years. One source was from Massachusetts and the other purchase was at a Santa Clara, CA show in 2009.
Singles from the original roll groups appeared to be later die strikes as they were not flashy, but rather drab, lack-luster. Perhaps the first strikes went into the 1975 mint sets. >>
Thanks for the info.
I might have seen more groups of business strike 76 type I's but the sample sizes
were so small as to be meaningless and most were just a few pieces that were said
to be from rolls. I can remember only a single roll. They were all similar to mint set
rejects.
Most people may not realize how poor these are even in the mint set. Just finding
what I'd call an MS-63 takes some small effort. Nice choice attractive coins make
up perhaps only about 45% of mint set mintage. The rest tend toward the ugly.
Gemmy coins are scarce and true Gems are very scarce.
It's great to see other perspectives on moderns. This goes double for coins for which
I have as little experience as the '76 t I.