| Author |
 Replies: 26 / Views: 11,386 |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
3831 Posts |
When I checked the mint mintage figure last time, I did note that there was only 8000 of 1992 dollar coins struck. If this is true, why so little when the rest of the mintage are at least in millions? Or was this some kind of special production figure? But aren't they not included in the figure usually?
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
2830 Posts |
G'day, according to Renniks, 22nd edition:
mintage was 40,000 - mint sets only.
Peter in Darwin
|
|
Rest in Peace
Australia
661 Posts |
Don't forget the 118,500 in mint sets.
regards,
|
|
New Member
United States
21 Posts |
gxseries,
Are you referring to the 1992 Barcelona Olympic Aluminium/Nickel/ Copper 1 dollar coin? None of the sources I have show a mintage of 8,000 or 118,500 in mint sets either.
If we are talking about the same coin I can post the information I have although the numbers are different from one source to another.
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
432 Posts |
Post the info anyway... I'm interested! The info I have (Rennicks) says different too. It lists two different RAM Wallets, Royal Easter Show edition, Individual Proof and Silver Proof's... No MoR's tho!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Australia
3831 Posts |
I'm puzzled - the reference that I referred to is the official RAM mintage and from no other references as I haven't bought a Maccas or Renniks (shame on me) http://www.ramint.gov.au/about_ram/...malCoins.pdfThis is the very same PDF that I used when I checked out the mintage for my site. According to it, the mintage of the 1992 "Five Kangaroo" is at 0.008 million which is a mere 8000 coins, which is either a typo or maybe my eyes are just tired. That said, does that mean that the only non-commemorative dollar coins were struck in 1984, 85, 94, 95, 98, 2000, 04-06? I would have long completed the set if it wasn't for the 1992 dollar coin... |
|
Formerly nancyc
Australia
5385 Posts |
Maybe that mintage figure is for Mint or Proof sets & doesn't belong on the stat sheet for circ coins. Human error?
I'm certain there were no 1992 Mob of Roos for circulation.
life is a mystery to be lived not a problem to be solved
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
372 Posts |
2005 had both, commerative and roo's.
|
|
Formerly nancyc
Australia
5385 Posts |
2005 had both, commerative and roo's.
That's true, but supposedly it wasn't originally planned that way. Some sort of slip up or mishap at the RAM was responsible for the 2005 MOR's.
There's been a fair amount of speculation as to what happened, but I don't know if it has ever been formally announced.
life is a mystery to be lived not a problem to be solved
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
372 Posts |
You are correct, Nancy, the 2005 MOR's wasn't supposed to be. There was a screwup with everything happening at the RAM at the time, and it was decided to proceed with them.
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
432 Posts |
Ja, I too am confused... Instinct says to go with the OFFICIAL SOURCE, but 1992 MoR's? UNLESS they were 1991 MoR's minted in the calendar year 1992.
Rennicks: (2004 p.88 & 1998 p.53)
1992 $1
RAM Wallet - 13,996
Royal Easter Show - 26,500
Standard Issue Proof - 2,940
Silver Proof w/ stop/start milling - 12,500
Silver Proof w/ continuous milling - 2,500
No mention of MoR's!
RAM Mintage Figures (2007 p.3)
$1 - 1992 - Five Kangaroo's - 0.008
Seems pretty clear that does!
So yeah, I dunno. Seems no one on the forum has ever seen one tho. Does anyone here have a contact at RAM that we can verify thru?
Edited by Zaggy
02/06/2008 11:22 am
|
|
New Member
United States
21 Posts |
quote:
That said, does that mean that the only non-commemorative dollar coins were struck in 1984, 85, 94, 95, 98, 2000, 04-06? I would have long completed the set if it wasn't for the 1992 dollar coin...
That is correct. As nancyc said, there were no 1992 MOR dollars struck for circulation. There were some Mob Of Roos 1987, 1989, 1990, 1991 in mint sets only. In 1991 the Royal Australian Mint converted one of its presses to allow visitors to strike their own dollar coin. The resulting mintage was 22,500. With regards to the 2005-06 coins, according to McDonald's guide: "It appears the obverse 2005 dies were accidentally mixed with 2006 MOR reverses. When the error was discovered it was decided to continue with the mismatched striking to avoid publicity that would be generated from a low issue mule issue." |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
3831 Posts |
Interesting. Not too sure where Renniks and Maccas would get their info from other than from the official mint releases. By any chances do anyone else have the older catalogues of the RAM mintages? It might just be a typo for this edition but not for the others.
My partial coin collection http://www.omnicoin.com/collection/gxseriesMy numismatics articles and collection: http://www.gxseries.com/numis/numis_index.htmRegularly updated at least once a month. |
|
New Member
United States
21 Posts |
That is interesting. You would think that they all would get their information from the same source, yet the mintage numbers they report vary, sometimes substantially.
Of the books that I have I find Krause to be the least reliable when it comes to Australian coins, but it has a simplistic approach that is sometimes helpful. Renniks and Maccas are both great books but they differ somewhat in the information they offer. When used in tandem they compliment each other and give you a much more detailed, and I would think accurate picture than either would by itself.
But none of them shows any mintage for 1992 MOR.
|
|
Formerly nancyc
Australia
5385 Posts |
gz, I would say you can stop looking for a 1992 MOR, it's a non-existent coin. Where the .008 figure in the RAM stats came from I can't say, but to me you MOR collection is complete.   life is a mystery to be lived not a problem to be solved
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
206 Posts |
There were also 66 789 in the 5 coin set, but they were all Barcelona types as well. It would be nice to think there are 8000 1992 MOR out there, but I have never sighted nor heard of one before either.
I'd go with nancyc, set complete.
|
| |
Replies: 26 / Views: 11,386 |
Posted 02/04/2008 04:08 am
