| Author |
 Replies: 22 / Views: 4,061 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
19972 Posts |
They're new and the Mint is always improving their processes.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7840 Posts |
Do you think that the mint already changed the composition and did not tell the public about?  Kinda like the WEB Notes of late 80's - mid 90's. Edited by oih82w8
09/26/2012 3:13 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1903 Posts |
Anyone weight one? They still weigh 5 grams?
Addendum:
Just hunted up a 2012P out of my pocket change jar....it isn't super shiny but it does weigh spot on 5 grams
Yours a 2012D?
Edited by unholyroller
09/26/2012 4:42 pm
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
262 Posts |
Same composition since 1866 [except mid-1942 to the end of '45], nothing to see here...yet.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
20753 Posts |
Due to the economy being so poor and so many people out of work, the Mint started to hire people. This helps keep them off the unimployment lines. They sit them down, give them a can of auto polish and have them put a shine on all new Nickels one at a time. With election time approaching, the additional people working may sway people to vote a certain way.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
613 Posts |
Hope they're not doing spit polish.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1431 Posts |
Glad I'm not the only one who hates how cheap the post-'05 nickels look and feel. No relief at all, and what was the purpose of changing the obverse design? (at least they didn't stick with the '05 portrait. yuck!)
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1796 Posts |
Yeah, without a deeper relief the current nickels look like game tokens rather than coins.
I could see the current obverse looking nice if the relief was as pre-90s deep.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2224 Posts |
As somebody that has handled tens of thousands of nickels, I also have noticed that many 2001 nickels have a finish very similar to the chromium plating found on Canadian nickels. I've looked everywhere and have not been able to find anything on the subject. Anyone else notice this or have any info? Was the Mint experimenting that year?
|
|
Valued Member
United States
402 Posts |
Wait five more years or so until that coating really wears off. Maybe we can have a recall like the Auto Industry. "Bring in your 2010 nickles for replacement". Did see a couple that were really bad already and dont think they would make another five years.
edgman
|
|
Moderator
 United States
189969 Posts |
Quote:
Maybe we can have a recall like the Auto Industry. "Bring in your 2010 nickles for replacement". All the more reason to stock up on some gems and keep them safe.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
543 Posts |
Maybe if they make it when a cheaper metal such as zinc or steel, then they could raise the relief without losing money on the coin production.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
379 Posts |
I have to agree. Being a cashier, I see hundreds a day and they definitely seem shinier. Almost like a different composition. Maybe the mint pulled the old switcharoo with the rising cost of nickel  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
613 Posts |
I think Nina was on target with the larger fields and of course the fresh shiny newness of a recently released-to-the-wild nickel.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1227 Posts |
Billy, I'm slightly revising my opinion. I recently found a half-roll of BU 2012's (anybody want 'em, by the way?) and the OP has a point--I expect new nickels to be shiny, but this is almost a *brilliant* shininess--not in the "BU" sense, I mean in the original sense of the word "brilliant." I still think the larger fields have something to do with it, but I'd bet they changed polishing chemicals or something.
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 22 / Views: 4,061 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 09/26/2012 2:37 pm
