The Great Back Plate Survey

The whole "mule" thing interests me, especially given that I've only seen some information on mules and the exact back plates that make them. So, I've decided to do some major research in this area.

And as such, I need your help.

If you have a $1 note from 1957 through 1977A (pre-1981, where they restarted the back plates at 1 again), I need you to send me the following information:

Series and backplate number.
If you want to note if it's a star, that's fine, too.

At this time, only $1. I will be expanding to $5 possibly at a later time.

Please send this information via e-mail ONLY at:

backplatesurvey@teamsaber.com

Hopefully after a few months of research, I'll be able to post some of my results.

John

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

There are no mules in the $1 Series 1957 SCs, nor in $1 FR notes through 1977A.

What exactly are you looking for?

 

There are no mules in 1957 SC, but in every note after that until 1981 series FRN, there are. Remember, in the 1957 Series, they started with back plate 1 since they went to the new 32-up printing. However, 1957A continued on from when 1957 stopped. However, if they every used a plate from the 1957 (before 1957A was printing), that's a mule. They kept doing that until the 1981 series, when they (finally!) restarted the back plate check number at 1 again. However, even in 1981, you can sometimes find a 4-digit back plate check number.

Let me restate that:
1957 they used back plates 1 through 145 (for example)
1957A started at 146 through 205 (again, just an example, not real).
1957B started at 206 through 447 (again, example)
1963 started at 448 through 650.

If you have a 1963 with back plate 429, it's a mule.
If you have a 1957B with back plate 159, it's a mule.


John

 

For example, like this Series 1963 note with plate# D1/429 from the first run for the Kansas City Federal Reserve District? :smile


Or this star note from the first run for the Minneapolis Federal Reserve District with Plate# C7/442?



Back plate numbers 447 and lower for Series 1963 are mule notes -- New Series 1963 front plates with Series 1957B Silver Certificate back plates.

Back plate numbers from 1963 increment until the back plate changed for the Series 1981 -- For Series 1981A, I have a change-over pair, Plate# G8/706 for S/N G00615726B (Series 1981 back plate) and G106/16 for S/N G00615727B (new Series 1981A back plate):



Finally, here is a Series 1981 note with a 4-digit back plate number (Plate# B127/3286):

 

Let me restate that:
1957 they used back plates 1 through 145 (for example)
1957A started at 146 through 205 (again, just an example, not real).
1957B started at 206 through 447 (again, example)
1963 started at 448 through 650.

What you have described is the usual misunderstanding of how back plates were used (even with your examples). For most of the production of small-size currency there has never been a relationship between back plates and the series they were used with. Back plates are a uniform sequence intended to be used with whatever faces were/are in production: Early 12-subject backs were used for all series - GCs, SCs, FRBNs, NB, FR and US notes. The 18-subject and 32-subject backs followed suit although with less classes.

Until the introduction of the Next Generation design, stocks of back sheets were printed and routed to wherever they were needed. When a transition occured from one series to the next, this was independent of back production. Sheets were not printed from a fresh set of back plates, but operations continued as though nothing happened.

Yes, in 1981 a new back plate sequence was started over at 1 for most denominations, but my research has indicated that this was not necessarily related with the introduction of a new series. And new sequences did not appear with every new series. Only with Series 1996 NexGen notes was a new back plate sequence begun for every series.

Did you get this idea from Azpiazu's $1 book?

 

So you're stating that you wouldn't count a 1969C with back plate 112 (from way back in the 1957 series) as a mule?

Please let me know what research you have (references, please) about back plates. Most barely recognize back plates at all, except when there was a known "reset" (like in 1981).

John

 

So you're stating that you wouldn't count a 1969C with back plate 112 (from way back in the 1957 series) as a mule?

No. First, I doubt that plate was still in use then (1971-3) or sheets from it were still available for printing. Secondly, when the first 32-subject $1 backs were made they were intended for any series being produced. Your scenario can be found in different series and classes of early 12-subject currency, and mules of that nature do not exist in those notes.

Some of my research can be seen here, www.smallsizefives.com; some can be found in Paper Money; and some is still in progress.

Jamie Y.

 

First off, the 1969C/BP112 was purely hyperbole. Second, if in fact, as you state, that no backs were meant for any specific series, then how come we have mule designations at all? The micro/macro mules shouldn't really be counted as mules, nor should the 1981 $1 4-digit BP.

You can't call one a mule and the other not.

Even the late-finish plates where a micro number was engraved in macro style shouldn't count according to you, as it doesn't matter what the number was assigned as it doesn't match any specific series.

John

 

<< Second, if in fact, as you state, that no backs were meant for any specific series, then how come we have mule designations at all? >>

This is the pervasive myth about mules: Just because a plate was used with two different series does not make one of them a mule. The notes considered mules have some other fundamental, distinct difference either in the plate serials, the use of the plates, or because more than one sequence of plates exists.

<< The micro/macro mules shouldn't really be counted as mules, nor should the 1981 $1 4-digit BP. >>

The micro/macro mules are designated as such because of differences in the sizes of the plate serials. Yes, the micro plates are typically called Series of 1934 and the macros Series of 1934A (and only by collectors), but this is to distinguish between the different designs, not because there was intent to only use micros with micros, etc. The $1 1981 4-digit plates, and all other reset back plates from the 1980s and 1990s, would qualify as mules.

<< Even the late-finish plates where a micro number was engraved in macro style shouldn't count according to you, as it doesn't matter what the number was assigned as it doesn't match any specific series. >>

They are in every sense of the word. The $10 faces 86 and 87, and $5 face 307 faces are true mules: They should have been Series 1934 but instead were finished as Series 1934A. This is clear as day in the BEP plate ledgers. The backs are considered mules not because of their association with any series, but because they bear obsolete elements used alongside contemporary plates.

The key fact with all the mules above is that two sequences existed: micro and macro plate serials (micro/macro mules), obsolete and current plate serials (late-finished mules), and different sets of back plates (the 1980s/1990s DC mules). If you only have one set of plates being used, such as during the Series 1957 SCs and the 1963-1977A $1 FR notes, how can you have any mules?

 

For whatever my opinion is worth, I will tell you that Jamie (Jamericon) is an authority in Small Size notes. He is well known and often consulted in this area. I for one hold his expertise in very high regard...

Thanks for some Great information Jamie...glad to see you over here as well.

Regards,

RickieB

 

Funny thing of the Internet: anyone can claim to be an expert, so one often has to be careful. I do not know Jamie nor his expertise, and while I hoped I came off non-confrontational with my discussion with him, I'm also not doubting I came off defensive.

Jamie, regardless of the your agreement to the "mule" category of the notes from 1957 through 1977A, I still hope I can get your (and others') help in this. I've already acquired close to 600 back plates in the series, with some interesting finds.

For example, a 1969D with back plate 1472 was reported. This back plate is in the range for 1969B! Note that I haven't had a report of 1472 being on a 1969C or 1969B, so perhaps this plate was a late finisher?

I also have reports of back plates 1129 and 1137 in the 1963A series, but these are in the range of the LATE 1963B notes. Interesting....

Interesting to hear your comments on these findings.

John

 

John...you are so right about that!

I do not think you were confrontational at all....my post was not meant as and end all answer either. I can assure you that this is one of the areas that I do not really get that much into and by no means do I have any accumulated knowledge in that area.

I do not know jamericon personally, but I do know some of his work.
I think if anyone here could help you sort this out it would be him or a person who goes by the user name "Numbers".

Both of these guy's get into great detail on these subjects.

I for one hope to follow this thread and learn from it as well, but to be honest, my interest lies elsewhere.

Best of luck to you with this quest!


RickieB

 

You are not confrontational nor defensive. We are just having a lively discussion about paper money. And my expertise has nothing to do with the internet - I have worked hard to get to this point.

What you are observing is normal use for back plates and face plates. Please correct me if I am mistaken, but from your comments "...is/are in the range...," it appears as thought you think that plates are used in perfect sequential order. Plates generally are used in sequential order, but this should be taken loosely. I have observed many instances where a sequence of 12-subject plates were used in reverse order! Some plates were used only once and some are were used many times, giving a scenario where then a plate, say with a serial in the 1000s is being used with plates in the 1300s, etc. Sheets may get used long after they were printed. Faces are printed in response to orders from Federal Reserve banks. To facilitate quick production when these orders come in, the BEP keeps ample stocks of backs ready.

<< For example, a 1969D with back plate 1472 was reported. This back plate is in the range for 1969B! Note that I haven't had a report of 1472 being on a 1969C or 1969B, so perhaps this plate was a late finisher? >>

Series 1969B, 1969C, and 1969D $1 FR notes were delivered between May 1971 and October 1974. Inclusive here is an overlap in the delivery dates for all three series from May to September 1972.

<< I also have reports of back plates 1129 and 1137 in the 1963A series, but these are in the range of the LATE 1963B notes. Interesting.... >>

Again these two series have overlapping delivery dates from January to August 1969.

(You can find these delivery dates at www.uspapermoney.info. Actual printing dates would be better, but often these were not made public. In any case, the printing dates obviously occurred prior to the delivery dates, and the notes were delivered soon after.)

The key fact here is not the series, but the dates. That these notes were delivered in the same time period likely means they were also printed in the same time period, or very close to one another. Modern currency faces are not mixed, but they would be pulling back sheets from the same stocks. This is why you find back 1472 on a 1969D, but not 1969B or 1969C, and also what you described with backs 1129 and 1137.

Have you organized these data in any meaningful way? This is necessary to see what was going on. Did you record the serial numbers or face plate serials?

 

(a) Thanks!

(b) Sorry I've been a bit scarce on the forum lately; I'm in the process of relocating for a new job, so there's life going on. And I just spent the better part of an hour typing up my post in the other thread, so I've gotta run.

(c) What Jamie said.

(d) I've got a few hundred 1957-57B $1 star notes from this project already neatly listed in a spreadsheet; I'll send that to your email address to give you a feel for how mixed the plate numbers get. You'll note that the series boundaries are completely ignored--for the face plates as well as the back plates, since at that time the signatures and series date were overprinted rather than engraved in the plates....

 

Hmm? Sorry about a little bit of thread hijacking, but I'm very curious about this -- Numbers, this note in my collection doesn't fit into your analysis. In 1957, 32-subject sheets were used, so they were printing 5,000 sheets (160,000 star notes) per run. Why does my note fall in between runs 12B and 13B?

Run# First 160,000 serials assigned Actual serial known to exist
[...]
11B * 064 00001 B - * 065 60000 B * 065 43647 B [in my collection]
12B * 070 40001 B - * 072 00000 B * 070 57837 B [in my collection]
* 073 48152 B [in Clay's collection]
13B * 076 80001 B - * 078 40000 B * 077 97843 B [in my collection]

To redeem my thread hijacking, I really wish we, as a group, could define exactly what a mule note really is -- A definition of mule notes seem to be one of the more confusing issues for paper money collectors.

 

Clay, his survey is looking for the beginning of the printing runs to determine which ones were gap printing. This is from the top of that page:

And in my update, I will be putting my data (as it is now) online shortly for people to review.

John


John

which print runs actually contain gaps.

 

Hey, I am well certified in Pirate vs. Ninja debates on who would win!!

 

Exactly. So your note is from run 12B, just not from the part of run 12B that's of interest for my purposes. A much longer explanation is here if you really want one.

 

Possible error in the July BEP Report

Hey Numbers---please forgive me for going off topic but all other attempts at contacting you have failed.

Six weeks ago someone on another forum claimed that a co-worker found some $1 2006 A-G notes. This new block should have shown up in the July BEP report but it has not. Perhaps the BEP accidentally omitted this block from the report and this should take some further looking into?

Thanks,
nos

 

UPDATE!

The survey results (as they currently are) can now be downloaded!

http://www.teamsaber.com/john/back_plate_survey.pdf

If you have any back plate/series combinations not listed, please let me know!

Any possibility of getting this thread as a sticky for a while?

John