I know what you all are going to say, and I already know the answer to the question: To save copper for the war efforts. But my real question is, they still used a lot of copper in nickels, if I remember correctly, so I just wanted to ask, why not COPPER-plated steel cents for 1943 instead of zinc? Or even, why not copper-plated zinc cents like we have now? I don't remember reading anything about them needing zinc for the war efforts, and even though I'm not that smart, I'm quite sure that they could have spared enough copper to plate steel or zinc cents for that one year, as plating doesn't take much metal. On an interesting not though, 15 years ago, when I was (ironically) 15 years old, working my first job as a grocery bagger, I asked this nice cashier I used to always bag for, if it were confusing to have the "silver colored" cents with silver nickels and dimes, and she told me "No, because the cent were always dull in color, while the other coinage shined". Hm......I wonder how many people would complain if the government made us go back to zinc-plated steel cents, and people would be passing or trying to pass cents for dimes and nickels. Maybe THAT would make people want to get rid of the cent once and for all. :devil:
Not a complete answer, but you are correct. The war nickle contained 56% copper. However, that is a significant reduction from the normal 75% copper used for all the other years. I am not sure how important this was, but the war nickles also contain 0 nickle. Also, just look at the trouble they had when they made the copper plated zinc cents and that was 40 years of advancement after the steel cents.
When I used the steel cents as a child, we called them "lead pennies". The zinc was somewhat corrosive and turned very dark, very quickly after being handled. I still have a 3 coin PSD unc set that my little brother took out of the coin envelope. His fingerprints are very clearly seen on them to this day. But more to the point, is that coins are very expensive to handle. They are heavy and costly to transport, sort, clean and package and return to the banks. The only people wanting them to stay around are the armored car companies I think. The banks no longer want them it seems. Unfortunately, the government is much more likely to follow the wishes of the banking institutions than that of the general population. IMHO gary
I may be totally off on this but I remember a conversation I had with a gentleman back when I had a paper route. (mid seventies). He said the steel cent was psychological as much for copper conservation. At a time when the government was asking the public conserve materials and grow "victory gardens" the steel cent reminded every man. woman, and child in the country that the government was being forced to make changes for the war effort too. If the coins had been copper plated then this message would have been lost. It may have been the ramblings of an old man but I always wonderd if he knew something that most of us had no idea about.
I had a post on that exact same psychological angle written and then decided not to post it. I had heard the same theory and they probably is some merit to it since the amount of copper diverted was miniscule compared to the amount the country typically consumed. Switching the cent to steel saved some 3200 tons of copper. Sounds like a lot, but when they decided to use silver instead of copper for the winding of the electromagnets separating the U 235 in the atomic bomb project, that was 15,000 tons. So all the copper saved on the cent would have just done one fifth of the electromagnets on the Manhatten project. (Typical annual consumption is in the millions of tons.)
