| Author |
 Replies: 49 / Views: 1,389 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
733 Posts |
I recently discovered the 2016 W Gold Coins celebrating the 100th anniversary of the Mercury dime, Standing Liberty quarter and Walking Liberty halfAt first I thought this was the best promotional concept the US Mint ever devised The correct anniversary date, fractional gold weights that match the fraction coin values, 24kt / .9999 Gold and they were the same size as the original coins OR so I was led to believe I did some more research and all 3 are slightly smaller than the original coins • Dimes are 17.91mm vs the 2016 Gold Dime is 16.5mm • Quarters are 24.26mm vs the 2016 Gold Quarter is 22 mm • Halves are 30.61mm vs the 2016 Gold Half is 27mm Seems insignificant, but it bothers me, if they had gone with 22kt they probably could have maintained the original diameters Plus, there is a huge premium added for these coins.
I hate to drop $5-$6k for a set of these and be disappointed when they show up If you have the set convince me that they are worth the money |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1212 Posts |
I had all of them, sold them, I did replace only the dime.
You have to be able to buy into the fact that they aren't silver, that's #1.
The dimension didn't bother me. Probably no one is going to be fondling these coins out of the classic anyways, with negates the feeling of the slightly different diameters. To me that was a non issue. It's just that they were gold. Our government controlling the mint like this just really irks me, that they couldn't do this in silver like I think they really would have liked.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
187446 Posts |
Quote:
I did some more research and all 3 are slightly smaller than the original coins... They had to be these sizes because these were minted using existing gold coin legislation. That legislation allows the mint to pretty much do any design the want as long as they used the described weights, dimension, and purity. If they wanted more accurate dimensions, that would have required new legislation that may not have passed in time. |
|
Moderator
United States
187446 Posts |
Quote:
Our government controlling the mint like this just really irks me, that they couldn't do this in silver like I think they really would have liked. The Mint needs a silver coin law like the gold coin law. Without it, they are stuck with creating silver medals with no legal tender status. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10029 Posts |
I got the 2016 version of the Walker. I live the design and the look of the gold, but as you said, it would have been better if it was regular sized. I did not get the 2016 dime partially b/c of size and partialy b/c the mint did not even go to the trouble to make it full split bands. Why go to all the trouble to make a commemorative if its not going to be the original design? At one time I remember Daniel Carr was toying with the idea of having people who wanted FSB to send theirs to him and he would make it so. Not sure why that never took hold. Maybe not enough people showed interest?
I do not know if the 2026 deim is FSB or not. I had no interest and gold is too high for me to worry about it anyway.
How much squash could a Sasquatch squash if a Sasquatch would squash squash? Download and read: Grading the graders Costly TPG ineptitude and No FG Kennedy halveshttps://ln5.sync.com/dl/7ca91bdd0/w...i3b-rbj9fir2 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1272 Posts |
To make you (and me) feel worse, these were available on the secondary market for a small premium over spot from 2017-2019. Sadly, I only bought the walker during that time
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7184 Posts |
I did get all three back in 2016.   The dime was originally sold out but the mint emailed me to say there were others available.   Each coin were offered at different times with no set The old system at the mint was hard to get through.   I did think the pricing was steep but these three coin designs were my favorites designs. If they were silver as the originals they would have sold considerably more taking away the uniqueness of thes coins. |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
733 Posts |
Quote:
Gilly wrote
Probably no one is going to be fondling these coins out of the classic anyways, Fondling these is not my concern, these are supposed to be commemoratives based on the original design so I figured they would at least be the same diameter, at least they are very close in size to the originals Quote:
Jbuck wrote
They had to be these sizes because these were minted using existing gold coin legislation. That legislation allows the mint to pretty much do any design the want as long as they used the described weights, dimension, and purity I guess they just stuck with weight and dimension because the purity is not the same as the 2016 fractional Gold Eagles We, so far no one has really convinced m that these are worth 25% over spot I'm thinking about just buying the 2026 versions, which I'm not understanding because they have the 1916 date on them Maybe I can get the 2026 set and trade it to a dealer for a 2016 set? |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1272 Posts |
2026 set will be equally or more expensive from the mint
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
733 Posts |
Quote:
machine20 wrote
2026 set will be equally or more expensive from the mint The current US Mint prices for a 1/10, 1/4 and 1/2 Gold Eagle are considerable lower than the average sold prices for these. I know the price of the 2026 coins will be more because the set includes a 1 ounce silver medal but that should be easy to recoup on the secondary market I'm just hung up on a 2026 coin having a 1916 date, makes it feel more like a medal and less like a coin |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1212 Posts |
Quote:
Fondling these is not my concern My point being that the difference is negligible, especially taking into account that most will keep them in the capsule or get them graded. So "in hand", you really won't feel that there's any significant difference in diameter. It's just that YOU know the spec is different. The main difference to me is the metal is different. That's the real downer. |
|
Moderator
United States
187446 Posts |
Quote:
I guess they just stuck with weight and dimension because the purity is not the same as the 2016 fractional Gold Eagles There is Eagle 22k purity and Buffalo 24k purity. I believe they chose the latter, as that is the law that allows them to offer different designs. |
|
Valued Member
United States
162 Posts |
I finished that set a couple years ago. They are a great set. I'm happy with them but I'm not going to try and sell you on them. The only thing I am upset about is the fact they are doing them again this year. I'm also the moron looking to buy the 5 coin sets this year. Those full ounce ones are going to be painful though.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
920 Posts |
I bought all 3 in 2016. Looking at my spreadsheet the dime was $205, the quarter was $485, and the half was $840.
The size difference probably isn't noticable unless you do a side by side compare.
|
|
Moderator
United States
187446 Posts |
Quote:
The size difference probably isn't noticable unless you do a side by side compare. Literally close enough for government work.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5601 Posts |
Boba, I too bought the Threesome in 2016, Some doubles, Outstanding designs, that I wanted and was fortunate to receive. The 2026 has the 1916 date? Sounds weird,  Either way, As pilotaggie stated, I'm not going to sell You on them, I Love the Concepts and replicated eye catching Historic " delicious " designs either Grab you, Or they do Not.  Thanks RPT for the U S Mint release prices of these 3 Commemoratives, With Today's spot Gold @ $4,765.60/ oz, They are worth a Tad more than paid back then, Just a Tad.....  @ Muddler, Sweet Photos, Thank You for posting them, Delicious Stuff.... Edited by Morgans Dad
04/09/2026 6:33 pm
|
| |
Replies: 49 / Views: 1,389 |
Posted 04/09/2026 09:30 am
