Peruvian copper

[Steve]

by way of an undetermined private US mint. I think I'm in love!

[coppercoins]

That's a really nice coin! Too bad ours can't be more like that one. If they get rid of Lincoln, I certainly hope they can go to something attractive like that.

[Steve]

Thanks, Chuck! I don't think our mint has it them any more. Actually, I don't think any of the world mints do. I can't think of any modern coins that I would consider having a "classic" design.
I got an email back from a dealer in Peru that I've bought from in the past. He says that the CN centavos in high grade are very scarce and he was wondering if this one might even be a rare pattern.

[tbirde56]

Super centavo!

[Robert]

That coin is literally one in a million. (check the mintage!) It's in great shape for being 140 years old.

My Krause doesn't seem to say where that coin was produced.



So why don't modern mints make "nicer" coins? I see several reasons.

1. Different metals. Compare French bronze to copper-plated zinc. Quite a difference in what the metals can do.

2. Different processes. Better, more powerful, faster presses.

3. Coins today are designed for producibility, not looks. Shallower, low-relief designs are the norm today. Compare todays' Lincolns with those of 1909. There are more differences than you'd think.

4. Hubbing vs. die cutting/sinking. The very thing coiners were trying to eliminate in the past (die irregularites) are what we modern collectors are seeking. Ironic. Today's coins are more "error-free" (I mean RPMs, DDs, blundered lettering) than ever but they sure are kind of dull in a way.

Sort of like bricks... they tried for hundreds of years to control the manufacturing process so all bricks look alike. They finally succeeded, but a wall or building made of uniform bricks just doesn't look right. Now they intentionally add things to the brick making process so that they acquire slightly different colors!

Now where was I?

Oh yeah, why can't the mint "make 'em like they used to"?


Opinions?

[Steve]

Heh, Robert. Here's another one-in-a-million coin.



I just noticed something very interesting while taking this picture. The nice one is medal alignment while this poor one is coinage alignment.

Brad or Robert, you wouldn't happen to have one that you could check the alignment on, would you?

[Steve]

I also checked and the design elements seem to match well between the two. The rays point at the same places on the letters, leaves point at or between denticles the same, etc... Hmmm....

[Robert]

I don't have a 1 centavo from that era but I have two 2-centavos (1877 and 1895). Both of mine are coin alignment.


Krause says many varieties exist for most small coins of that time, including die varieties, alloy varieties, re-engraved designs, etc so I suppose anything's possible.

Sorry I'm not much help on that one.

[tbirde56]

My 1863 1 and 2 centavo coins both are coin rotation types.

[Steve]

Thanks for checking guys! I don't know if the rotation is significant or not, but it's definitely different. I've got inquiries out to a couple people. I'll post more if I find out anything interesting.

[GarryN]

Those centavos are great. My local bid board is getting more and more into world coins, I will have to see if any from Peru come in.

[smed]

The 1895 2 centavos were minted at the Waterbury Mint in Waterbury Connecticut. Dunno about those 1 centavos...