2011 Mint Set has a special finish???

I agree with many of your points, brg. For the satin finish question, here, let me google that for ya:

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=satin+finish+coin+and+MINT

One of my points is that if these Mint set coins are nearly flawless by virtue of being struck specially, but are indistinguishable from circulation strikes then the number of ultra high grades will be higher than in years past as few, if any circulation strikes grade above MS-67.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

And I believe Doug already answered your question when he pointed out that coins in Mint Sets have been specially struck since the early 1990s. Thus, I wouldn't suspect there would be any more ultra high grades in 2011 than in say 2002 or 2003 (pre-Satin Finish). Unless they changed the process in some way from 2004 that is...I believe the mint set struck coins still fall into large bins after being struck, but they are struck slower and at higher pressure. They will still suffer from "bag" like nicks and blemishes for the most part.

As for your google remark, I have tried that and found mentions to car paint finishes. Not very helpful. I'm looking for an official or more detailed description of the minting process, not some dictionary definition of what made it on an "About.com" website.

 

I fixed the link. I didn't mean it to sound so smart-alecked. Sorry.

As for the finish, the difference is that the SF coins are burnished and then struck with sandblasted dies with more force than a circ strike.

The new finish likely doesn't have the sandblasted dies, but may still use specially treated planchets or dies that are prepared some other way, we don't know yet. The Mint is not forthcoming with the details as yet. The extra striking force may result in the improved strikes is my hypothesis.

I was asking Doug what he thought about it, but his answer is only an opinion as well.

 

Ah, no worries. I didn't take it as smart-alecky. It's hard to convey tone of voice in typewritten communication. Thanks for the link. I wish too that the mint would be more transparent with their processes. It was my impression of the sheer beauty and almost perfection of the SF coins that they must have been handled in a special way as compared to mint set issues from 2003 or 2004. There are many more contact marks on specially struck mint-set coins from earlier years than for SF years. While the pre-2005 mint sets may have been struck differently from "general circulation" coins, they must have still been dropped into hoppers before packaging.

I agree with you that the extra striking force likely accounts for the improved mint-set strikes. That, and the fact that the coins are only dropped into a hopper likely once before they are packaged. General circulation coins are struck at a weaker pressure, are dumped into hoppers, and then thrown around into bags, eventually most making it to the "N.F. String" rolls to be distributed to banks. I wonder if (in general) the rolls purchased directly from the mint fare any better than N.F. String rolls for quality? For example, I know that the 2004 and 2005 Jefferson Nickels were almost impossible to find in higher than MS66 quality, even from mint-direct rolls. MS67 is the exception, and MS68 circulation strike 2004 and 2005 nickels are almost unheard of.

 

5 of these have surfaced.



I was lucky enough to get one.

 

I have one similar to that 19Lyds.

 

I have a 5oz. hot springs quarter that has sp on it.I sent it to ngc it was in the 2nd batch of big quarters that were released this earlyier this year. it came back ms69ersp it some sort of chemicel and water wash 0n them after they were minted.I been practise my graded see a small scratch by the date and knew it was going to be a ms69 I also bought 2007w and a 2008w a couple of years ago when john binns was still on the air down on 224 paid 28 bucks apiece for them got lucky and the 2008 had the 2007 revese on it sent boyh those to ngc and they both came back ms 70's and here all those tv guys say maybe 1 out 10 graded a 70 you shoud feel lucky had the 2008 sold in less than a week for 625.00

 

The 2011 Mint Set coins are among the most beautiful products the Mint has produced in years. The designs of the quarters this year (imo much better than the 2010 designs, and infinitely better than the state quarters), along with the special strike created highly detailed coins. They are really stunning works of art. Even the Kennedy half from the set looks amazing. In fact, the looks of these coins blows away the even the proof coins (all that liberally applied frostiness is starting to look gimmicky to me anyways).

 

I would have to agree. I compared my 2011 uncirc sets with the pre 2005 sets and there is a marked difference in quality. I would have to agree that there are many ungraded but potential MS69 units from 2011 sets since the quality is stunning. My Kennedy "P" looks to be DMPL - very very shiny.

 

Doug thanks for the very extensive descriptions of satin/matte/proof/business, etc. It is greatly appreciated.

I just have to ask, what makes you think that the quality of the satin finish coins was "terrible" in 2005? In general, among us SMS/SF ultra-high grade collectors, that year (2005) is considered the highest quality year with an abundance of extremely pristine examples available (the 2005-P Satin Finish coins are particularly well struck and superb).

Indeed, 2005 is the only year for which MS70 Sacagawea Dollars have ever been graded (all 4 coins by PCGS and all Satin Finish). All Lincoln Memorial cents graded MS70 by either NGC or PCGS over the 50 years of the series were all Satin Finish coins from 2005 and 2006 (most from 2005). And, I have to tell you, these handful of MS70 coins are not a grade-inflation fluke IMO. I have seen Satin Finish coins so perfect I can't fathom how they would have survived the "normal" bin drop effects, especially if SF coins are more sensitive to abrasions than circulation strike coins.

------------------
On a side note, PCGS initially graded Satin Finish coins with the designation "MS", and with a descriptor of "Satin Finish" on the label. They eventually moved to the designation/grade of "SP", and even they still seem to be a bit confused sometimes. NGC has always graded all Satin Finish 2005-2010 coins with a grade of "MS", and notes in the description of the coin "SMS".

 

Doug, I can only attest to the standards for the Sacagawea dollars, as that is the only set I seriously collect in that timeframe. In 2000 when the Sac Dollars were first released, there was a rash of early graded MS69 dollars graded by NGC. Indeed, there were 75 graded within the first couple years of release, and that population has only moved by one coin since that time. Among serious collectors of the series, it is well known that these NGC graded 2000 coins were overgraded by post-2000 standards. This is usually chalked up to the fact that 2000 was the first year of the series and, thus, standards were "in flux" for the first few months. I mean, how do you know nit-pick the difference between an MS68 and MS69 coin for a coin that you haven't seen before?

Now onto the 2005 Satin Finish issue. It may very well be that some (or even most) of the mint sets were of low quality. But those which were cherry picked for superb coins were exceptional. I have to simply disagree with you that the "standards" changed. I have looked at hundreds of Satin Finish SAC dollars, and 80-90% of the MS69 Satin Finish coins from PCGS and NGC are correctly graded. I say "correctly graded" in my opinion, having been more familiar with this series than any other, and having seen thousands of graded examples over the years.

Another thing that may "skew" the perception a bit of what happened in 2005 is the sheer number of graded coins for the Satin Finish series. The Satin Finish was new, and thus in 2005, for the SAC dollars, there were more Satin Finish coins graded in that year alone than have been graded in all subsequent years (2006-2010). There were a total of 7,678 SF 2005 SAC $1 graded by NGC -- and there were only 4,171 graded SACs for the regular strike issues for years 2001-2004 combined prior to the 2005 release. The vast number graded means that even if a handful of those grade MS69, then the market will be inundated with them. That is the case today, and you can pick up an MS69 graded 2005-P Satin Finish SAC dollar for around $20.

So, in summary, it may be that the "general quality" of the 2005 and later Satin Finish mint sets were disappointing, but the coins that were good were exceptionally good. And, those which were exceptional were the ones sent in for grading. Thus, in my opinion it is not a "change in grading standards" but a "perception of change in grading standards". My argument is further supported in that the non-Satin Finish coins for the SAC series from the time-frame 2005-2010 continue to be exceedingly sparse in grades higher than MS67. For the SAC series, these non-Satin coins were available by direct ship from the US Mint, and were struck and subsequently handled quite differently from the SF Mint Set coins. And, the grades reflect this.

 

If you want to read a condensed version of my reply above, some of the 69's started "showing up" because of the sheer number of submitted/graded coins. The 2005 Satin Finish coins were submitted in numbers about 10 times higher than 2004 issues across all series. If you submit 10 times more coins, you get 10 times more MS69s ceteris paribus. Combine that with the fact that among the many "terrible" quality coins, there were some truly exceptional coins, nothing like the business strikes of years past. Having seen hundreds of SF coins, the well struck ones are truly heads above any business strike or mint set strike coins from 2004 or before. Of course, the "terrible" ones aren't getting sent in for grading by anyone with a brain.

 

Yes, you can also believe what you want. We both have our opinions.

 

I believe that grading standards have ebbed and flowed over the years, but also from grader to grader at the TPGs. I do not believe that anything "magical" or appreciably different happened in 2005 (which is what you suggested in your previous posts). There is a difference between thinking that things have changed over time, and believing that somehow the appearance of MS69 SF coins implies that the grading standards changed in general in 2005.

I know that people believe that the OGHs were graded more strictly. And, maybe at that time as a whole the grading standards were more strict. But, I don't believe it's the OGH itself that has anything to do with that grading practice. Indeed, I know a lot of reputable dealers and sellers who believe now that you should avoid the remaining OGH coins, because those which were undergraded have been cracked out and resubmitted. I believe that grading can vary from grader to grader on a given day just as much as it can from 1990 to 2010. Part of the OGH lore in my opinion is also similar to the "superiority of PCGS lore" that is also rampant among collectors. Simply put, I have seen both NGC and PCGS coins undergraded, overgraded, and for the most part correctly graded.

I assume you are referring to Proof coins graded 70? or to Bullion AGEs or ASEs? There are a handful (that is, less than 50 ever graded) standard issue non-proof US coins graded MS70. There has only ever been one business strike coin graded MS70 by PCGS, and that 2003 cent was later reviewed because it developed a spot and the grade was changed to MS69. To my knowledge, ALL of the MS70 coins remaining from NGC or PCGS are Satin Finish coins from 2005-2010. If you're referencing proof coins or bullion issues, then I have no information there.

I don't have a hard time "believing" that they changed the grading practices in late 2004 or early 2005 as you suggest. The facts just don't suggest such a change. Indeed, the facts are that a new type of modern coin was released in 2005 (the Satin Finish coins). Some (or even many) of these coins were struck with such perfect surfaces that they were assigned MS69 grades at a higher rate than the mint-set or circulation coins previous to that. The occurrence of MS69 grades for a new type of struck coin does not imply causation to a "loosening of grading" during the same time frame. Indeed, evidence (which I already pointed out) suggests that non Satin Finish coins continued to be graded at the same pre-2005 strictness (as evidenced by almost no coins grading above MS67). Yes more MS69 coins appeared in 2005, but that is because they were not the SAME as the coins graded in years prior, not because the grading standards suddenly became lax.