Options
Composition of US Coins
RWB
Posts: 8,082 ✭
Proposed legislation asking the mint to experiment with different materials for coins is nothing new. The mint has been experimenting with alternative materials for over 150 years.
The curious thing is that since WW-II, adopted compositions have been driven almost entirely by the vending machine and coin operated device business. The vending machine requirement that five-cent coins have similar electromagnetic properties as standard Cu-Ni alloy, forced the Treasury to approve the expensive and difficult to work Cu-Ag-Mn wartime alloy. Adoption of clad metal in 1965 was based almost entirely on its electromagnetic compatibility with the former .900 fine Ag-Cu alloy; likewise for the “golden” dollar coin.
None of these selections has necessarily been the best alternative, but merely the one that satisfied a group of businesses and their lobbyists.
With advances in technology, many vending machines can be reprogrammed remotely. The cost of changes are a much lower percent of revenue than in the days of mechanical replacement mechanisms.
The questions:
1. Should new coinage material selection be based on the greatest overall benefit, or must new compositions fully satisfy the vending machine industry?
2. Should a $5 coin be introduced, concurrently with elimination of the paper dollar, copper coated zinc cent, and the circulating half dollar? (Retaining the half for commemorative purposes, only.) [Note: This could permit vending machine owners to remove the expensive paper bill discriminators – saving about $400 per device.]
The curious thing is that since WW-II, adopted compositions have been driven almost entirely by the vending machine and coin operated device business. The vending machine requirement that five-cent coins have similar electromagnetic properties as standard Cu-Ni alloy, forced the Treasury to approve the expensive and difficult to work Cu-Ag-Mn wartime alloy. Adoption of clad metal in 1965 was based almost entirely on its electromagnetic compatibility with the former .900 fine Ag-Cu alloy; likewise for the “golden” dollar coin.
None of these selections has necessarily been the best alternative, but merely the one that satisfied a group of businesses and their lobbyists.
With advances in technology, many vending machines can be reprogrammed remotely. The cost of changes are a much lower percent of revenue than in the days of mechanical replacement mechanisms.
The questions:
1. Should new coinage material selection be based on the greatest overall benefit, or must new compositions fully satisfy the vending machine industry?
2. Should a $5 coin be introduced, concurrently with elimination of the paper dollar, copper coated zinc cent, and the circulating half dollar? (Retaining the half for commemorative purposes, only.) [Note: This could permit vending machine owners to remove the expensive paper bill discriminators – saving about $400 per device.]
0
Comments
need to be dramatically reduced and the coinage overhauled to be more
in keeping with the age but doesn't require any sweeping revisions in
coinage material.
The penny is less than worthless. We lose money when they are made
and everytime they are used. There is no metal on earth that will change
this situation so it should be eliminated. This will open up another slot
in the cash register that can be filled with any of the current dollar coins
going back to the SBA.
The nickel isn't a waste of space yet but is headed in that direction. Why
not just make it out of aluminum and not adapt vending machines to be
able to count it. People haven't used many nickels to buy things in dec-
ades now so all that's needed is a little placard on vending machines that
reads "no nickels". Even this could be foregone since customers would
quickly learn that nickels don't work. Indeed a 5c loss is so insignificant
that some vendors could even turn off the discriminator and accept any-
thing the right size and shape as a nickel.
Just my two cents worth (or less)
<< <i>One of the arguments against aluminum during the 1973 cent hearings was that a coin made from it was so light that it would not always push down through the coin checking mechanism, but hang up in it. >>
Aluminum the size of a nickel shouldn't have any trouble.
It shouldn't cost more than a few dollars to find out though I'm sure they could spend millions of tax payer money to conduct a study.
is dwarfed by the other costs of our government, so does it really matter?
<< <i>
<< <i>One of the arguments against aluminum during the 1973 cent hearings was that a coin made from it was so light that it would not always push down through the coin checking mechanism, but hang up in it. >>
Aluminum the size of a nickel shouldn't have any trouble. >>
Why?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>One of the arguments against aluminum during the 1973 cent hearings was that a coin made from it was so light that it would not always push down through the coin checking mechanism, but hang up in it. >>
Aluminum the size of a nickel shouldn't have any trouble. >>
Why? >>
An aluminum nickel is 40% heavier than an aluminum cent.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>One of the arguments against aluminum during the 1973 cent hearings was that a coin made from it was so light that it would not always push down through the coin checking mechanism, but hang up in it. >>
Aluminum the size of a nickel shouldn't have any trouble. >>
Why? >>
An aluminum nickel is 40% heavier than an aluminum cent. >>
The aluminum cent in the Smithsonian weighs 14.4 grains, or 0.933 gram.
Times 1.4 = 1.306 grams, or about the weight of a half dime but about 37% wider and a LOT thicker.
Tell me why something that large and that thick and that light would not get caught up in a coin acceptor?
TD
Heck, even the scratch off ticket machine in our local grocery store only takes paper currency and that encompasses the entire state operated games in the State of Texas.
The vending industry is light years behind technology, it's just that right now, they do not need to fly a Coke machine into outer space.
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
1. Eliminate the cent and nickel.
2. Eliminate the paper $1.00 bill, $2.00 bill [if it is still being produced] and the $5.00 bill.
3. Keep the dime and quarter but resize them. Make a dime that is the size of the current cent. Make the quarter the size of the current nickel. Make the new dime and new quarter out of the same metals used to make 1947-1981 cents.
4. Start making the half dollar for circulation again. Make it the size of either our current quarter or the SBA, Sacagewea, Presidential and Native American dollar coins. Make the half dollar out of the metals now used to make our nickels.
5. Make the Sacagewea, Presidential and Native American dollars the size of Kennedy half dollars and make these coins with a metal composition that includes some silver [i.e. 5%].
6. Make $5.00 coins the size of Ike, Peace and Morgan dollars and make them wit a metal composition that includes some silver [i.e. 10%].
7. Change the designs for the dime [dump FDR and the torch], the quarter [the Washington obverse now and the reverse after the National Parks program is completed], the half [time for JFK and the presidential seal to go], the dollar [after the current programs are completed]. Have new designs for these coins created [no more dead presidents] which have an "American" theme [i.e."Liberty"].
8. For the new $5.00 coin, no dead presidents allowed, no living person allowed and again have an "American" theme.
<< <i>
The aluminum cent in the Smithsonian weighs 14.4 grains, or 0.933 gram.
Times 1.4 = 1.306 grams, or about the weight of a half dime but about 37% wider and a LOT thicker.
Tell me why something that large and that thick and that light would not get caught up in a coin acceptor?
>>
Weight seems to be the primary determinant of whether something goes through
a discriminator or gets hung up. I could well be wrong but I'd guess that light coins
get hung up springs and the like rather than being slowed by friction.