Mint Mark question???

ldarrellc · Senior Member

when did they start adding the Mint mark to the dies?

coppercoins · Site Admin

Mintmarks were first added to the dies to note where the coins were made. The first mintmarks were in the mid-1800s on gold and silver coins. The first cents with mintmarks were the Indian head cents of 1908. It had to do with noting distribution and circulation.

ldarrellc · Senior Member

not when did they start putting mint marks on the coins but on the dies. when did they quit punching mm's

coop · Expert Member

That started in 1990. With that non variable in place, most RPMs hunters stopped looking at coins that were current after that date. But we were wrong as the class 9 doubled dies were noted and other things were then looked at after they discovery of the single squeeze doubling is still occuring. Especially in 2006. Thanks to those discoveries most of us are looking at current coinage with a new interest.

coppercoins · Site Admin

Okay, now I understand. Mintmarks were punched directly into the dies until 1990.

In 1990 they were incorporated as a part of the master design before reduction. When the lathe reduced the design the mintmark went along with it. This was mainly to serve as a time saver, but also to eliminate incorrectly punched mintmarks.

For the hubs that did not require mintmarks, it was simply ground off.

wavysteps2003 · Expert Member

I knew that as of 1990 the mint marks were no longer punched into the working dies, however, I had tought that they were then punched into the master die. This could be a falacy since there are more than one master die used for the Lincoln cent each year and yet there is no position change to indicate this.

Incorporating the mint mark on the galvano seems the most likely idea, but I would think that since they have to reduce the image from two galvanos (S and D mint marks), why not do it from a third galvano. This way they have a complete set of galvanos for each year for Philadelphia, San Francisco and Denver.

WAVYSTEPS2003 aka BJ Neff

eagames · Expert Member

Just thinking out loud, I know nobody might know the answers:

There are plain cents with remnants of the d showing like on some of the 1998 wide AM cents. That means at some step those had Ds but they were removed.

That brings up the questions:

Are there multiple galvanos or just one with a D?

Was removing Ds that caused the phantom Ds the normal flow or for some abnormal reason where they switching dies from D to plain?

At what step (galvano or masters) do they remove the Ds?

Is it possible that they still punch the S mintmarks?

wavysteps2003 · Expert Member

The remenant mint marks, I believe in 1997, 1998 and 1999, were created by removing the mint marks from working hubs. Probably a case where Philadelphia mint ran out of obverse working dies and insteady of going through the whole process of making a working hub, had Denver mail them one or what they needed, which they ground the mint mark off and used as a Philadelphia obverse.

WAVYSTEPS2003 aka BJ Neff

coop · Expert Member

I thought it was both mints that used the D mintmarked hubs and the mintmark was filled in on the Philly mintmarks to make them appear the same height of the the field. If they ground the mintmark out, then it would appear as a lump the size of the ground out area. By filling the mintmark in that makes if the same height as the field. But during the years that BJ pointed out, this filling must have worn down faster than die wear and you can find some dies with the phantom D showing. I don't know if they changed the procedure since then, but there have been no mention about the phantom D's since then that I am aware of. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

wavysteps2003 · Expert Member

Coop - What would they use to fill a recess area; sic, the mint mark on a working die? Any material used would have to be the same tensile strength as the die and bonded to the die itself so that it could not "fall" out.

From the amount of 1997 and 1998 "phantom" mint marks that I saw, it would seem that a working hub was used to produce more than a few working dies with that anomaly. Also, that "phantom" mint mark tended to disappear as the die aged so that would also add to the count of coins made with those dies that did not show or showed just a small amount of the "phantom" D. Grounding out the mint mark on a master hub or a working hub would leave no mark since the mint mark is raised on these devices, unless the mint mark was not fully taken off, which seemed to be the case in 1997, 1998 and 1999 [(?), I question this last date for I have not seen one and it is supposed to be an S mint mark that was taken off].

This is what led me to believe that the D mint marks were ground off a working hub and used by the Philadelphia mint.

As far as galvanos are concerned, why just make two galvanos for the D and S mint marks, then make two master hubs, taking one and grinding off the D (or evem possible the S) for use in making Philadelphia Lincoln cents? Why just not make a galvano without a mint mark?. They do make new galvanos each year now and have been doing that since I believe 1983 (that date may be off a couple of years, but it was during this period that this practice was started), so, it would seem that they have this procedure down pretty pat.

The only other scenario would be to punch the mint marks into the master die which seems highly unlikely since more than one master die is made for a given year. No matter how hard you tried, mint mark placement would vary to some degree from master to master, which we do not see happening.

And while we are on the subject of mint marks, there is something that is overlooked day after day by we who search Lincoln cents. When looking at the mint marks post 1989, if you look very close and do comparisons, you will see very small changes in the positions of the mint marks from year to year, however, in 1995 not only was the position changed dramatically, but also the style of the font for the D was also changed. In 2000, because of the lay out of the date (there were no descending numerals) the position of the mint mark was again changed. This may have been the last change in the position of the mint mark that we will ever see since the next descending numeral that will be in the middle of the date will be in 2300. I imagine by then that all currency will be obsolete. And so will I, LOL.

WAVYSTEPS2003 aka BJ Neff

coop · Expert Member

Just reiterating what I was told a while back. The idea may be flawed according to your information. But my favorite year of the Letters on the obverse is 2001, as the letters are wider than prievious years. When I see the letters, I know before looking at the date it is a 2001.
I agree with coinage/currency being a thing of the past. Probably all transactions will be card type. All the coins we have them would be ancient relics.

Dick · Expert Member

Gentlemen, I do believe you are a bit wrong! In no particular order: We won't even have any of "Them thar things", ( coins, currency, even plastic), it will be a chip in our head, or somewhere else.
BJ, before 2300, won't we have a 2090, 2190, 2290, etc so as to have the "trailing number in place, (third), or did I miss the boat? In case you meant the second place, whew, it will be 29xx. ( After thought, Yes the three will "hang down),. Sortry.
I have noted that some of the 2xxx cents, are missing a lot of the date, and seems to be awfully soon to be showing up as abraision, (abraiding), but considering the great amount of coins being minted these days, maybe it is normal. This was quite normal for the 1982 cents. I think I have more with very little, or no lettering in the U. S. of A. letters. A little bit of "goop", etc is normal, but these are way out of reason. Not to mention a large amount of die cracks, all four corners of the memorial building, mostly on the lower corners.
BJ,
I plan on being around for a long time to come, but 2300, hmm, not sure about that! DIck