1804 Restrike

If the US Mint restruck the 1804 Dollar in the past, why can't they do it again today? For that matter, why not restrike all the coins 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of us will never be able to afford?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The US Mint has enough problems producing current issues (ASEs, AGEs, etc.) that re-striking past ones is unlikely now. TC

 

Well for one thing it's a slippery slope. Start with say the 1913 v Nickels (strike off say 50 million of them) And from there we can make a few tens of millions of 1877 Indian head cents, chain cents, 1909 S VDBs, 16-D dimes etc. How about this, any coin that sell for more than 10 times face we just fire up the presses until the market values drop below ten times face or for the precious metal coins twice bullion value. Wouldn't that be great for collecting?! Everyone could own any and every coin ever made. Don't have to worry about the value of your coins anymore because if they ever start increasing we'll just make more and knock it back down. Makes disposing of your collection easy though, just spend it because that's all they'll be worth.

I don't think that would go over well.

 

Interesting! I haven't really researched the 1804, just read a few articles over the years, Weren't they struck after 1804 as presentation pieces for foreign dignitaries? But, I thought The Mint struck them.

Yeah, I have the GMM replica, but just not the same as an official US issue.

 

China has granted your wish!

 

Well - I don't quite think it would be that bad. More than likely the albums would change to have a 1877 and 1877 restrike. I am sure the experts would be able to tell the difference. Might make it harder on us newbie's - but I am sure they would make the restrikes a little different just for us collectors.

 

I must admit I did not know that. I knew the 1823 large cent was restruck with the original dies and by private individuals. Would the mint even have original dies for these coins? I have never really thought about what might be in the vault. I was thinking they would have to make new dies to do what condor was suggesting.

 

I think collectors, or at least I, would be happy with replicas, not necessarily restrikes, of the uber rarities, as long as they’re official mint releases. I understand the concerns owners of these rarities have – GDJMSP posted a link to an article about the 1804 dollar, which explained the witch hunt that ensued for the restrikes due to concerns of the owners of the originals. However, as noted, the reproductions could be identified as such, possibly causing increased interest in the originals. I believe too, as noted, the reproductions would have their own secondary market price structure and would trade based on the rarity of that particular reproduction. If 20 million of them were made, they would trade at close to bullion value. But then, that’s one of the joys of collecting, not all purchases are made with the belief a profit will be made, some coins are just neat to have, regardless of investment potential.

 

Except maybe now in order to have a "complete set" you might now need both the original and the "restrike". So all that you have managed to do is increase the expense of a set with the addition of a bunch of cheap copies.

 

True, but, for 99.999999999999999999999999% of us that complete set was never a dream or feasible. So, the little guy wins by filling a hole and the big guy wins by the increased the value of the original, and The Mint wins with enormous profits. I'm looking forward to buying a roll of 1804's.

 

That sums it up better than any statement here. The way I see it, if it's a re-strike by anyone, be it the US Mint or a basement mint in China, it's still not an original and still not acceptable in my book as a hole filler. I mean, I'd like to own a Ferrari but because I can't afford one I'm not wishing Ford will redesign the Focus to resemble one so I can pretend I own one.
Guy~

 

Yes, but a lot of people do. Many lower cost sports cars are designed to emulate higher priced ones and that's what the average guy buys to satisfy his urge.

 

I just can't see the mint making duplicates of earlier coins. In terms of modern restrikes, the closest we have come was the 2009 UHR double Eagle (and boy, I wish they had used the same diameter as the 1907 double Eagle).

Earlier restrikes include the 1840-1849 proof half cents where the originals and restrikes can be differentiated by the berries being smaller on the restrikes.

 

I don't see a problem with restrikes as long as they are done by the government. If it is done by the government, it is legitimate, and if it is done by some guy in their basement or garage-in the USA, China or anywhere else- it's a copy, which is not much different then a counterfit, if there is any difference at all.

No one has ever said that the coins issued MUST bear the date of manufacture, it's just the way it has traditonally been done.

And really, it's not even done totally like that now. I think it is the Sac. Dollar that is released on January 2nd, is it not? The coins, bearing the new year's date, were minted in the previous year, thus bearing a date that is not the same date it was made.

I don't think it will happen though, for one because I would guess most of the dies are gone, but I couldn't see it happening even if the dies were around and in perfect condition.

What I think we MIGHT see someday, is classic designs used with current dates. Not as the total production run...but a small selection, maybe 10% or so, of overall production, carrying the old design but a new date. This would lend well to being a multi-year project, with (for example) one year having the Capped Bust designs, the next year the seated designs, the year after that the Barber designs, and so forth. A little creative license should, in my opinion, be taken, for example having the Flying Eagle cent design with the Seated designs, and the Indian cent designs with the Barber, and if they should do the interesting unique designs of the early 20th century, a Lincoln with the Wheat reverse to go with the Standling Liberty quarter, Mercury Dime, Buffalo Nickel and walking half.

I think it would be interesting to see if they did the dollar though. I bet if they did, we would have a Morgan and a Peace, Seated, etc using the same style coin as the Sac. and Presidential dollars, although I personally would like to see them in their classic style, however made out of aluminum.

If it is long enough in the future, they might have to consider a set with the original Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln designs!

The main goal of this set, would be educating the USA's general public, and perhaps even the world's general public, about the history of the US monetary system.

 

Yes the dies are gone, and the reason they are gone is because mint employees used to make restrikes and sold them for their own benefit. (See US Mint and Coinage by Taxay, the chapter "A workshop for their own gain.") Sometimes it was the employees, more often it was the mint director and his cronies. They would restrike rare pieces desired by collectors and then sell the restrikes as originals. Mint Director Snowden had a fascination for medals coins and tokens related to George Washington, so he used to have restrikes of rarities, patterns, and mules made up so he could trade them for rare specimens of Washington pieces that were not in the Mint's collection. They made up the Class III restrike 1804 dollars and sold them with letters of authenticity as being original coins struck in the year 1804!

It was because of these abuses that Superintendent Linderman ordered all of the old dies and hubs destroyed (after a few specimens of each were struck off for himself) and that in the future all of the dies would be destroyed at the end of the year.

 

There are several valuable early American copper restrikes, notably the 1804 cent and several proof half cents.

By the strictest definition, the 1804 cent restrike is not a true restrike since it used a different reverse die.