| Author |
 Replies: 24 / Views: 3,844 |
|
Moderator
 United States
188342 Posts |
Quote:
As the value of precious metals fluctuates over time, the U.S. Mint has to constantly find new ways to keep currency manufacturing affordable. A five-cent nickel that costs as much as seven cents to make is a problem, but so is a coin that suddenly looks and feels different because its metallurgic ingredients were changed. To solve this problem, the U.S. Mint turned to computer simulations to help it redesign a more cost-effective nickel. Quote:
In the end, the researchers created a prototype five-cent piece made from a mix of copper, zinc, and nickel that was about 40 percent less expensive to produce than what's banging around in your pockets right now Full Article
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3470 Posts |
Martha sure looks good on that fantasy coin.
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
10625 Posts |
It may cost .07 to make it but think of how many times it's used over the course of it's life. It's still common to find 1964 nickles in change and even older. Well worth the .02 in my opinion...
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2023 Posts |
That was interesting. I particularly like the ways they changed the visual design to get a similar feel.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10284 Posts |
I kinda wish Martha would go on it. It looks better than the current Jefferson. Martha Skelton Jefferson 1748 - 1782 was the wife of Thomas Jefferson. Died long before he became president. I think I'd be happy if the Jefferson nickel series ended along with a metal composition change. I would be very happy if they quit wasting money on coins that cost more than they are worth. |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
6514 Posts |
Thanks for the article jbuck. Very interesting. At least they're not plating zinc with something.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
665 Posts |
7 cents to mint a nickel sounds terrible but it is only part of the equation. There are two basic questions that need to be considered:
1) What is the cost of the metal in the planchet. If a consumer can return a higher value from melting a coin then they will... That is the reason we no longer have silver in our circulating currency. The melt for a Canadian silver dollar (pre-1968) is approx $13 CDN... if these were still issued as currency then the supply would evaporate into the melting pot within weeks of release. I assume Morgans & Peace $'s have the same dynamic.
2) Presuming the planchet cost is less than the face value then the next measure is the lifetime cost of the coin. This includes all the times the government touches the coin from the original alloy smelting, minting, shipping to banks, shipping back to the mint at end of life and remelting of old & obsolete coins. I would imagine that it is quite a bit more than 7 cents however as an enabler of the economy, the lifetime value needs to exceed the lifetime cost.
The reasons above are why the UK retired the half penny and Australia, New Zealand and more recently Canada retired the 1 cent. It is also why Canada retired the $1 and $2 bills and replaced them with coins... the lifetime cost was less. I am actually surprised that the US still issues 1 cent coins given the low purchasing power of the coin and $1 bills when there is a much cheaper coin alternative available.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
74138 Posts |
Very interesting! Thank you for sharing this.
Errers and Varietys.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2271 Posts |
If they switched to aluminum they would reduce the cost by 70%. Then in a few years they could shrink it to the size of a cent and reduce the cost another 40%.
Meanwhile the recovery of cu/ ni from existing coins could pay for the transition.
The US government is pound foolish and penny foolisher.
Time don't fly, it bounds and leaps.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
188342 Posts |
Quote:
At least they're not plating zinc with something. True!  Quote:
I am actually surprised that the US still issues 1 cent coins given the low purchasing power of the coin and $1 bills when there is a much cheaper coin alternative available. You are not the only one. Both needed to get gone years ago.  Honestly, both the cent and nickel need to be discontinued. The dime is "the new cent" in terms of purchase power and has been for a while. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8516 Posts |
Quote:
Martha sure looks good on that fantasy coin. Oh, Sally Hemings would be a good choice. Oregon coin geek.....*** GO BEAVS ! ! ! ***
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2618 Posts |
Very interesting article, thanks for sharing jbuck!  I for one think this is a great idea to use computer simulation instead of physically striking various alloys. If they can reduce the cost by 40%, I'm all for keeping the nickel. (The cent on the other hand just needs to go.) |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
20753 Posts |
As has already been stated in the past, no need to retire any coins just yet. Soon enough no coins will be necessary. Everything will be done with plastic cards. Changing the type of metal is just wasting time. Stopping all coins soon will be the way to go. If the government would slowly reduce the amount of coins being made now, more and more people would go with plastic cards.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3402 Posts |
Looks great. Let's put her on the $20 note. She's been there before.
Maybe we'll go to polymer notes as well, they last longer.
KK
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote:
. I for one think this is a great idea to use computer simulation instead of physically striking various alloys. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if that switch leads to a lot of unforseen issues especially quality issues. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6514 Posts |
Quote:
.a lot of unforseen issues especially quality issues. The new nickel might be an error hunter's dream.  |
| |
Replies: 24 / Views: 3,844 |
Posted 06/27/2018 11:45 am
