| Author |
 Replies: 31 / Views: 3,922 |
Page 3 of 3
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
12839 Posts |
Quote:
We should have iconic emblems placed in their stead! Perhaps the Liberty Bell & a Mountain Range for the mile-high city? I think I like it. "P" & "D" are (as has been pointed out) similar enough to cause confusion.... especially on poorer strikes. However, I'm sure no one cares about it besides us collectors, so it'll never change. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Quote:
So has denver, and san francisco. I know San Francisco deliberately made coins with no mintmark. But the only case of Denver making a coin without the mintmark that I know of was the 1922 "plain" cent and that was unintentional and simply the use of a die that was worn out and should have been retired. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12839 Posts |
So what specifically are all these coins that have no MM from WP, D, and S? Were they within the past 50 years? And were said coins intended for circulation?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1704 Posts |
Quote:
I find "P" mintmarks unnecessary. "The absence of a mintmark is a mintmark in itself", yes, exactly. Everybody knows that, on a US coin  Quote:
"no mark" means Philadelphia, & has since 1792. The Mint struck coins at Denver,and San Francisco without mint marks during 1965-67 when the San Francisco Assay Office was being prepared to strike proof coins and cents. And more recently West Point did not use a mint mark. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8137 Posts |
I find a P mintmark unnecessary because, outside of the collector community, no one seems to care where their coins are made.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
807 Posts |
US coins from mid-1964 to 1967 were made without marks, regardless of mint, in accordance with a special Act of Congress intended to discourage coin collectors from withdrawing them from circulation. In fact all silver coins made after mid-1964 were made without a change in date, & it was initially expected (I have seen contemporary references) that there would be no 1965-dated coins at all. But that is an exceptional circumstance.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1208 Posts |
I liked the Philly coins when they weren't marked. It was
tradition, and since everyone knew what was going on, it
never should have been changed... IMO. So, no...
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
613 Posts |
I think it's always been a "status" thing that Philly is the "main" mint, so there's no need for a mm. The privy mark idea is pretty cool, though, maybe a one-off year of privy marks instead of blank, D, S, and W. What would the symbolic privy mark be? The Liberty Bell for Philly is perfect, the mountains or a prospector pickax for Denver, the helmet-and-sword logo of West Point could be cool. Golden Gate Bridge or a cable car for San Francisco?
|
|
Moderator
 United States
188660 Posts |
Quote:
A better idea is to eliminate the cent altogether. Agreed, at least for circulation.  Quote:
I think the West Point issue is probably part of the reason. West Point fulfills the surplus order for cents when Philly can't make them all. The mint doesn't want collectors snatching up the W cents (or the no-mint mark cents when a P is added to the Phillies). This is correct, or at least has been in the past. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1781 Posts |
West Point struck cents from 1973 through 1976 with no Mintmark. They've also struck bullion American Silver Eagles with no Mintmark -- though I'm not sure of all the years so I will defer to the expertise of others on this. The 1922 No D is missing the D due to overzealous die abrasion and is known mainly due to the fact Philadelphia struck no cents that year. It is conceivable that other branch mints struck coins without a Mintmark in error but were not noticed because there was a Philadelphia Mint counterpart. Of course we have the 1982 No P Dime and a small handful of proof coins missing the Mintmark due to omission in error. Then there are the missing edge lettering Presidential dollars ... None of this includes coins Struck Through Grease or whatever -- such as the once well-known 1989 No Mintmark 25c promoted by the late, Harry Forman. Edited by koinpro
05/11/2015 11:09 am
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Denver no mintmarks 1965-67, HOW did I forget that!!?
One other case of a mint issuing a coin without a mintmark, the medium letter 1840 half dollar. Struck in New Orleans with no mintmark because they muled the seated Liberty obv with an old reeded edge capped bust reverse. The capped bust halves had the mintmark on the obv
|
|
Valued Member
United States
61 Posts |
I would actually prefer to only have a "D" mintmark for circulation coins due to my aging infrastructure. In my folders I turn the Philadelphia coins to reverse and the Denver coins to the obverse so I am sure I have the mintmarks correct. Very truly yours, Mintmarks  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1208 Posts |
Well, some of the " no mint mark" situations are special instances... Business strike ASEs are minted all over the place, depending on year, and yet have no mint mark. The excuse is that it is NIFC, and bullion. Then you have the 65-67 period, which was considered a move to avert an economic crisis as the switch was made to clad coinage. The only real circulation situation I have seen mentioned, I assume, is WP minted cents from 73-76. I know nothing about that, and I assume it wasn't just uncirculated sets? That one seems odd to me if they were for circulation, and it would have been 'neato' to have W cents for a few years. Maybe the mint thought that it would be so sensational, that people would hoard them if marked? |
|
Moderator
United States
188660 Posts |
Yes, that is the reason. The cents were minted in West Point because Philadelphia and Denver alone could not meet demand. Supplementing the mintage with cents from West Point would have been pointless if they went right into collector hoards.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Quote:
The only real circulation situation I have seen mentioned, I assume,
is WP minted cents from 73-76. I know nothing about that, and I
assume it wasn't just uncirculated sets? That one seems odd to
me if they were for circulation, The San Francisco situation was also for coins for circulation. They struck cents for circulation with no mintmarks in 1978 through 1983. Mintages (rounded to the nearest million) were 1978 292 million, 1979 752 million, 1980 1,185 million, 1981 880 million, 1982 1,587 million (don't know composition breakdown), and 1983 181 million. West Point also struck quarters for circulation from 1976 to 1979. Mintages were 1976 376,000, 1977 7,352,000, 1978 20.8 million, and 1979 22.7 million. My figures for West Point cent coinage for circulation shows 1975 to 1986. I don't see any made there in 73 or 74. Mintages for the 75 - 86 period range from a low of 400,000 in 1986 to a high of 2,036 million in 1984. |
|
Page 3 of 3
|
Replies: 31 / Views: 3,922 |
Page 3 of 3
|
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 05/10/2015 03:15 am
