Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;cladking, post: 1554901, member: 68&quot;]The mint has been much less than forthcoming about mint sets since 1965.&nbsp; Indeed, one could say they have been quite secretive about their processes and the evolution of these processes over the decades.&nbsp; Here&#039;s what I believe I know based on observation and trying to reconcile as much of what they say and the facts that leak out as possible.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>I believe they started striking mint set coins on numismatic presses under higher pressure and at lower speeds in 1965 when the proof presses were shipped to San Francisco for production of the SMS&#039;s.&nbsp; There were numerous processes involved with these and their delineation is far beyond the scope of this post.&nbsp; Suffice to say they used numerous processes throughout the entire production and there are numerous varieties created though they are difficult to differentiate in most cases.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>In 1968 these SMS&#039;s were for most practical purposes continued except that dies did not recieve as much care and they were rarely basined as were most of the SMS dies.&nbsp; &#039;68 mint sets are generally good quality but press tonnage was lower than in later years (and SMS years).&nbsp; Dies appear to have been swapped out after around 40,000 strikes but a few were overlooked longer.&nbsp; As the years went by there were minor changes but in general changes were not begun until the beginning of the year so there are few varieties in packaging or processes used to make the coins each year.&nbsp; Mint set quality though does vary considerably over the years and between denominations.&nbsp; Generally speaking the finest made specimens every year went into the mint sets.&nbsp; However, these superb specimens can be very few and far between and large percentages of them can be chewed up in the handling processes.&nbsp; Most mint set coins have been washed and dried and the driers are like cement mixers with ground corn cobs so many coins will get banged up pretty badly.&nbsp; Packaging of pre-1985 mint sets contain thin films of PVC plastic and will damage the coins in the long term.&nbsp; 1968-P pennnies are already all corroded or spotted.&nbsp; The &#039;84-D is approaching 60% damaged already.&nbsp; &#039;69 quarters are getting bad.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>They used polished or burnished planchets over the years but usually these are quite scarce.&nbsp; In 1985 many more burnished planchets began appearing and their incidence soared in 1986.&nbsp; Dies were rarely polished but basining is a little more common.&nbsp; Mint set coins can be highly PL with many like some SMS&#039;s and &#039;88-D cents being essentially indistinguishable from proofs.&nbsp; Some SMS are probably true proofs but these are not cameo.&nbsp; All the cameo SMS I&#039;ve seen are highly PL from basined and polished dies.</p><p><br /></p><p>In the early &#039;90&#039;s burnished planchets became the norm and many of the coins are very PL from polished dies.&nbsp; Most of these though will have ubiquitous marking on them.&nbsp; In &#039;05 they began chrome plating the dies to give mint set coins a distinctive finish and extend die life.&nbsp; It appears they are doing this with the regular coinage now and especially the parks quarters and territories issues.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>The mint descriptions of the minting processes involved in mint sets has been extremely misleading since they named the SMS.&nbsp; These coins were much more like low quality proofs than mint set coins.&nbsp; Essentially they were proofs struck only one time (at least most of them).&nbsp; They never one time admitted there was any special process to mint these in any advertising or press releases printed in the hobby press until 1997.&nbsp; It was this year that they took out a full page ad to offer &#039;97 mint sets (in Coin World) with a partial description of the special processes.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>Very few people even today realize these coins are actually different.&nbsp; No they can&#039;t bbe positively differentiated from circulation issues and even regular issues are sometimes PL but on average they are far better made from far newer dies than anything you can find anywhere else.&nbsp; Most dies will make at least 15 coins for each one made by the mint set presses.&nbsp; The mint set dies are even reused to make regular issues after they are too worn for mint sets.&nbsp; For some coins you&#039;re actually better off looking for Gems in rolls because mint set coins can be atrotious with scratches and surface problems.&nbsp; But for most moderns there is simply no choice but a mint set coin because they simply weren&#039;t saved.&nbsp; When you see something like a 1971 quarter you can be sure that it originated in a mint set.&nbsp; If it is well made this really constitutes virtual proof since circulation issues were rarely well struck.&nbsp; Try finding something like a BU roll of dimes or quarters from before 1996.&nbsp; Even cents and nickels can be elusive for some dates.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>These considerations don&#039;t apply to the souvenir mint set coins.&nbsp; They are just a nice press run from newer dies but are not mint set quality.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>You can&#039;t positively identify any modern as having come from a mint set but wiuth practice you can generally tell them apart with uncanny accuracy.&nbsp; There are some varieties that don&#039;t appear in mint sets so they are positively not from mint sets.&nbsp; And, of course, there are several dates and issues that weren&#039;t included in mint sets.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in