I'm not sure if I should be on the lookout for 2006 $10 notes, because I have not seen one in quite a while. The only ones I find in circulation are 2013 tens, and the occasional 2009. Were there smaller quantities printed for the 2006 year?
I don't believe so. Paper notes don't last very long, something like 18 months of constant use. Older notes disappear from circulation most likely because they simply wear out.
Thanks for the info. By the way, I just noticed the "Rapid City" stamp on it. Its traveled quite a bit!
BEP website information on paper money typical lifespan. https://www.uscurrency.gov/life-cycle/data/life-span
As Steve's post helps to clarify, the whole 18 month lifespan average applied to $1 notes and was last accurate about 20 years ago. For some reason, this time frame seems to linger on as still being current with the general populous. The average lifespan has increased tremendously over this time due to upgraded fitness scanning equipment with a large factor being that currency is no longer destroyed if it is simply loaded into said evaluation equipment back side up. Anyway, I've noticed a huge change in the series dates of $10 and $20 notes found from years' past. For $20 notes, the majority of series dates found are from 2013 and 2009 with I'd say 7-8% being from 2006 (or earlier). I remember for a number of years when $20 notes would be stubbornly comprised of nearly all Series 2004A well after Series 2006 notes went into production but now 2004A notes comprise 1% or less of $20 notes in a 100 note strap. Series 2004A $10 notes are now quite a rarity to be encountered these days as well. Here's some early strap stats of mine for $10 notes: Strap of tens from 10/14/06 WM- The series: 1999-12 2001-37 2003-43 2004A-8 Strap of tens from Wamu late December 2008 The Series: 1990-1 1999-2 2001-10 2003-26 2004A-43 2006-18 Strap of tens from Chase over there by Vons. September, 2009 The series: 1995-1 (F-A) 1999-3 (BE-A, BH-A, BK-B) 2001-2 2003-13 2004A-30 (GL-*) 2006-51 What's interesting about the last two stats is there was a huge increase in 2006 notes found within only 10 months of each other. I suppose it goes to show how dynamic currency replacement is and how quickly one series can begin to supersede another.
After getting some money from the bank today, about 25% of the 20s were 2004A, 25% were 2004 (no A), 25% were 2006, and the rest was 2009 and '13. So the older 20s apparently aren't as rare, but I was curious about the tens, because they aren't seen as often as fives and twenties, so I was therefore surprised they would wear out at all.
Thanks for the info and stats on the 2006 $10 hotwheelsearl, Steve, and NOS. By the way, that $10 in the picture at top made its way back into circulation yesterday. So, unfortunately, it will probably wear out and get destroyed pretty soon.
In addition to the above comments, here are the total quantities printed for the recent $10 series: 2013: 2,182,400,000 2009: 1,465,600,000 2006: 1,529,600,000 2004A: 851,200,000 So the long-running Series 2013 does have an advantage over the others in absolute numbers. But Series 2009 and 2006 started out just about even, so the difference you're seeing is down to Series 2006 having much more time to wear out than Series 2009. By historical standards, Series 2009 and 2013 both had quite long durations. The Obama administration spanned eight years but produced just two signature combinations on the currency; you have to go all the way back to Eisenhower for the last time that happened. Most of the time, there's more turnover, so series dates change more often, so there are a larger number of series in circulation simultaneously.
