5 oz America the Beautiful Quarters

[Didz]

From my understanding these particular coins will only be available from bullion dealers.. does anyone have any info on them and what bullion dealer would be the best to buy them from? Just curious..

[PerryHall]

These will probably be sold through the same distribution channels as the ASE's so those dealers that sell ASE's will probably stock these 5 oz coins.

[PerryHall]

Does anyone know if NGC or PCGS will have special oversized slabs for these large coins? I can't imagine they would miss the opportunity to profit on this new series.

[Schatzy]

Does anyone know if NGC or PCGS will have special oversized slabs for these large coins? I can't imagine they would miss the opportunity to profit on this new series.

 

Current Requirements

The largest diameter for the regular single holder is 45mm and 80mm for the multi holder.

 

The coin is going to be 3" and the thickness of the coins would be greater than twice the standard one ounce bullion coin specifications.

 

So unless NGC make a big fatty holder the coins will not fit into the current slabs.

[cpm9ball]

Does anyone know if NGC or PCGS will have special oversized slabs for these large coins? I can't imagine they would miss the opportunity to profit on this new series.

 

Current Requirements

The largest diameter for the regular single holder is 45mm and 80mm for the multi holder.

 

The coin is going to be 3" and the thickness of the coins would be greater than twice the standard one ounce bullion coin specifications.

 

So unless NGC make a big fatty holder the coins will not fit into the current slabs.

 

Jaime,

 

NGC does make an oversized holder. Here's the link:

 

Chris

 

http://www.ngccoin.com/services/oversize-holder.aspx

 

 

[RWB]

I want to know if there will be oversized Coke machines for these?

[DWLange]

For what they'll cost, the Coke should have actual cocaine in it, like the original formula.

[RWB]

$125 to $150 each is my guess.

[PerryHall]

Since these will be bullion coins, I figure about 5X what ASE's sell for or a little more for the novelty.

[BillJones]

I want to know if there will be oversized Coke machines for these?

 

I think that the mint is slipped to a new low. This is the kind "bullion junk" that the cable TV barkers sell. "Get the first strikes of these giant 2005 Walkers! Get the first strikes because they will be sharpest and the best investments."

 

I wonder if this thing will get a listing in the Red Book? I wonder if this thing will be "coin" i.e. legal tender. If so will it rate a spot in the Registry type set?

[RWB]

Congress can mandate this stuff, but can't work together to solve national issues. Teddy Roosevelt's "square deal" it's not.

[BillJones]

Congress can mandate this stuff, but can't work together to solve national issues. Teddy Roosevelt's "square deal" it's not.

 

The current Speaker of the House makes one nostalgic for Joe Cannon who was one of TR’s contemporaries. And no, Joe was not a good guy, but at least he is now a part of history, and we now know that he did ruin the country.

[PerryHall]

I want to know if there will be oversized Coke machines for these?

 

I think that the mint is slipped to a new low. This is the kind "bullion junk" that the cable TV barkers sell. "Get the first strikes of these giant 2005 Walkers! Get the first strikes because they will be sharpest and the best investments."

 

I wonder if this thing will get a listing in the Red Book? I wonder if this thing will be "coin" i.e. legal tender. If so will it rate a spot in the Registry type set?

 

Why are you blaming the mint? Blame congress that passes these idiotic laws requiring the mint to produce these coins.

[astrostu]

These will NOT be 2x as thick as current 1 oz bullion coins. In fact, they will be INCREDIBLY thin which is part of why the Mint has not yet produced them. There was an article maybe a month ago where the Mint was responding to questions about them and they were complaining that they were having issues where (a) the thing was too thin to strike well, and then (b) that the law required edge lettering which made it an even bigger issue. They said they had gone to Congress to explain to them that they never think about math or physics when they legislate, but Congress wouldn't change the requirements.

 

I tried to run through the numbers to just do a quick estimate: The density of silver is 10.49 gm/cm^3. 3" diameter is 7.62 cm. This is an area of 45.60 cm^2. 5 oz = 141.7 gm. Take (141.7 /45.60) / 10.49 = 0.2962 cm = 2.962 mm thick.

[cpm9ball]

These will NOT be 2x as thick as current 1 oz bullion coins. In fact, they will be INCREDIBLY thin which is part of why the Mint has not yet produced them. There was an article maybe a month ago where the Mint was responding to questions about them and they were complaining that they were having issues where (a) the thing was too thin to strike well, and then (b) that the law required edge lettering which made it an even bigger issue. They said they had gone to Congress to explain to them that they never think about math or physics when they legislate, but Congress wouldn't change the requirements.

 

I tried to run through the numbers to just do a quick estimate: The density of silver is 10.49 gm/cm^3. 3" diameter is 7.62 cm. This is an area of 45.60 cm^2. 5 oz = 141.7 gm. Take (141.7 /45.60) / 10.49 = 0.2962 cm = 2.962 mm thick.

 

2.962mm thick - give or take? Wow! They could use them as wrappers for the candy in Whitman's Samplers.

 

Chris

[Schatzy]

These will NOT be 2x as thick as current 1 oz bullion coins. In fact, they will be INCREDIBLY thin which is part of why the Mint has not yet produced them. There was an article maybe a month ago where the Mint was responding to questions about them and they were complaining that they were having issues where (a) the thing was too thin to strike well, and then (b) that the law required edge lettering which made it an even bigger issue. They said they had gone to Congress to explain to them that they never think about math or physics when they legislate, but Congress wouldn't change the requirements.

 

I tried to run through the numbers to just do a quick estimate: The density of silver is 10.49 gm/cm^3. 3" diameter is 7.62 cm. This is an area of 45.60 cm^2. 5 oz = 141.7 gm. Take (141.7 /45.60) / 10.49 = 0.2962 cm = 2.962 mm thick.

 

This formula doesn't work for the silver eagle than:

 

Area 12.9396cm^2

1 oz = 28.34

 

(28.34/12.9396)/10.49 = 0.2087 cm = 2.087 mm thick but the silver eagle is 2.98 mm

 

According to your estimate it is the same size as the silver eagle.

[astrostu]

These will NOT be 2x as thick as current 1 oz bullion coins. In fact, they will be INCREDIBLY thin which is part of why the Mint has not yet produced them. There was an article maybe a month ago where the Mint was responding to questions about them and they were complaining that they were having issues where (a) the thing was too thin to strike well, and then (b) that the law required edge lettering which made it an even bigger issue. They said they had gone to Congress to explain to them that they never think about math or physics when they legislate, but Congress wouldn't change the requirements.

 

I tried to run through the numbers to just do a quick estimate: The density of silver is 10.49 gm/cm^3. 3" diameter is 7.62 cm. This is an area of 45.60 cm^2. 5 oz = 141.7 gm. Take (141.7 / 45.60) / 10.49 = 0.2962 cm = 2.962 mm thick.

 

This formula doesn't work for the silver eagle than:

 

Area 12.9396cm^2

1 oz = 28.34

 

(28.34/12.9396)/10.49 = 0.2087 cm = 2.087 mm thick but the silver eagle is 2.98 mm

 

According to your estimate it is the same size as the silver eagle.

 

Okay, I actually forgot about the whole Troy ounce thing. So, the weight will be 5 oz = 155.5 gm which changes the thickness to 3.25 mm.

 

I didn't test this to see if it worked on the current ASEs, though it should ... diameter is 4.06 cm so area is 12.95 cm^2, weight is 1 Troy ounce = 31.10 gm ... 2.29 mm thick.

 

Hmm. Doing it another way, I still get 2.29 mm thick for the current 1 oz ASEs. It should be simple math ... am I missing something:

 

V=π*r^2*h, and V=m/rho ... equate the two, solve for h, and you get h = m / (rho * π * r^2).

 

Plug in 1 Troy ounce (31.1 gm), silver's density of 10.49 gm/cm^3, and the radius of the ASE (2.03 cm) and you get a thickness of 2.29 mm. Plug in 5 Troy ounce (31.1*5 gm), radius of 1.5" (3.81 cm), and you get a thickness of 3.25 mm for the new ones.

 

Alright, trying this another way, the mass will be 5x as much, the radius 1.877x, so an area 3.523x. Fitting 5x as much mass into an area 3.523x as large requires a thickness of 1.42x as much, which agrees with the above calculations. But I'm fairly sure the current ASEs are thicker than 2.3 mm.

[cpm9ball]

These will NOT be 2x as thick as current 1 oz bullion coins. In fact, they will be INCREDIBLY thin which is part of why the Mint has not yet produced them. There was an article maybe a month ago where the Mint was responding to questions about them and they were complaining that they were having issues where (a) the thing was too thin to strike well, and then (b) that the law required edge lettering which made it an even bigger issue. They said they had gone to Congress to explain to them that they never think about math or physics when they legislate, but Congress wouldn't change the requirements.

 

I tried to run through the numbers to just do a quick estimate: The density of silver is 10.49 gm/cm^3. 3" diameter is 7.62 cm. This is an area of 45.60 cm^2. 5 oz = 141.7 gm. Take (141.7 / 45.60) / 10.49 = 0.2962 cm = 2.962 mm thick.

 

This formula doesn't work for the silver eagle than:

 

Area 12.9396cm^2

1 oz = 28.34

 

(28.34/12.9396)/10.49 = 0.2087 cm = 2.087 mm thick but the silver eagle is 2.98 mm

 

According to your estimate it is the same size as the silver eagle.

 

Okay, I actually forgot about the whole Troy ounce thing. So, the weight will be 5 oz = 155.5 gm which changes the thickness to 3.25 mm.

 

I didn't test this to see if it worked on the current ASEs, though it should ... diameter is 4.06 cm so area is 12.95 cm^2, weight is 1 Troy ounce = 31.10 gm ... 2.29 mm thick.

 

Hmm. Doing it another way, I still get 2.29 mm thick for the current 1 oz ASEs. It should be simple math ... am I missing something:

 

V=π*r^2*h, and V=m/rho ... equate the two, solve for h, and you get h = m / (rho * π * r^2).

 

Plug in 1 Troy ounce (31.1 gm), silver's density of 10.49 gm/cm^3, and the radius of the ASE (2.03 cm) and you get a thickness of 2.29 mm. Plug in 5 Troy ounce (31.1*5 gm), radius of 1.5" (3.81 cm), and you get a thickness of 3.25 mm for the new ones.

 

Alright, trying this another way, the mass will be 5x as much, the radius 1.877x, so an area 3.523x. Fitting 5x as much mass into an area 3.523x as large requires a thickness of 1.42x as much, which agrees with the above calculations. But I'm fairly sure the current ASEs are thicker than 2.3 mm.

 

There is a much easier way to calculate the thickness...................

 

 

According to my calipers, it's 2.96mm from rim to rim.

 

Chris

[Schatzy]

These will NOT be 2x as thick as current 1 oz bullion coins. In fact, they will be INCREDIBLY thin which is part of why the Mint has not yet produced them. There was an article maybe a month ago where the Mint was responding to questions about them and they were complaining that they were having issues where (a) the thing was too thin to strike well, and then (b) that the law required edge lettering which made it an even bigger issue. They said they had gone to Congress to explain to them that they never think about math or physics when they legislate, but Congress wouldn't change the requirements.

 

I tried to run through the numbers to just do a quick estimate: The density of silver is 10.49 gm/cm^3. 3" diameter is 7.62 cm. This is an area of 45.60 cm^2. 5 oz = 141.7 gm. Take (141.7 / 45.60) / 10.49 = 0.2962 cm = 2.962 mm thick.

 

This formula doesn't work for the silver eagle than:

 

Area 12.9396cm^2

1 oz = 28.34

 

(28.34/12.9396)/10.49 = 0.2087 cm = 2.087 mm thick but the silver eagle is 2.98 mm

 

According to your estimate it is the same size as the silver eagle.

 

Okay, I actually forgot about the whole Troy ounce thing. So, the weight will be 5 oz = 155.5 gm which changes the thickness to 3.25 mm.

 

I didn't test this to see if it worked on the current ASEs, though it should ... diameter is 4.06 cm so area is 12.95 cm^2, weight is 1 Troy ounce = 31.10 gm ... 2.29 mm thick.

 

Hmm. Doing it another way, I still get 2.29 mm thick for the current 1 oz ASEs. It should be simple math ... am I missing something:

 

V=π*r^2*h, and V=m/rho ... equate the two, solve for h, and you get h = m / (rho * π * r^2).

 

Plug in 1 Troy ounce (31.1 gm), silver's density of 10.49 gm/cm^3, and the radius of the ASE (2.03 cm) and you get a thickness of 2.29 mm. Plug in 5 Troy ounce (31.1*5 gm), radius of 1.5" (3.81 cm), and you get a thickness of 3.25 mm for the new ones.

 

Alright, trying this another way, the mass will be 5x as much, the radius 1.877x, so an area 3.523x. Fitting 5x as much mass into an area 3.523x as large requires a thickness of 1.42x as much, which agrees with the above calculations. But I'm fairly sure the current ASEs are thicker than 2.3 mm.

 

Australian 5oz Lunar Silver Coin Specifications:

Diameter: 60.3mm

Thickness: 7.9mm

 

I still think the coin will be about twice the thickness of the silver eagle.

[astrostu]

{snip}

V=π*r^2*h, and V=m/rho ... equate the two, solve for h, and you get h = m / (rho * π * r^2).

 

Plug in 1 Troy ounce (31.1 gm), silver's density of 10.49 gm/cm^3, and the radius of the ASE (2.03 cm) and you get a thickness of 2.29 mm. Plug in 5 Troy ounce (31.1*5 gm), radius of 1.5" (3.81 cm), and you get a thickness of 3.25 mm for the new ones.

 

Alright, trying this another way, the mass will be 5x as much, the radius 1.877x, so an area 3.523x. Fitting 5x as much mass into an area 3.523x as large requires a thickness of 1.42x as much, which agrees with the above calculations. But I'm fairly sure the current ASEs are thicker than 2.3 mm.

 

There is a much easier way to calculate the thickness...................

 

 

According to my calipers, it's 2.96mm from rim to rim.

 

Chris

 

Yes, well, some of us don't have calipers. I'm still curious how to explain the extra ~0.65 mm on the ASEs. I know that it's not a smooth ideal cylinder, but I wouldn't expect that to contribute an extra ~25% to the height.

[cpm9ball]

{snip}

V=π*r^2*h, and V=m/rho ... equate the two, solve for h, and you get h = m / (rho * π * r^2).

 

Plug in 1 Troy ounce (31.1 gm), silver's density of 10.49 gm/cm^3, and the radius of the ASE (2.03 cm) and you get a thickness of 2.29 mm. Plug in 5 Troy ounce (31.1*5 gm), radius of 1.5" (3.81 cm), and you get a thickness of 3.25 mm for the new ones.

 

Alright, trying this another way, the mass will be 5x as much, the radius 1.877x, so an area 3.523x. Fitting 5x as much mass into an area 3.523x as large requires a thickness of 1.42x as much, which agrees with the above calculations. But I'm fairly sure the current ASEs are thicker than 2.3 mm.

 

There is a much easier way to calculate the thickness...................

 

 

According to my calipers, it's 2.96mm from rim to rim.

 

Chris

 

Yes, well, some of us don't have calipers. I'm still curious how to explain the extra ~0.65 mm on the ASEs. I know that it's not a smooth ideal cylinder, but I wouldn't expect that to contribute an extra ~25% to the height.

 

You don't have calipers, and I'm not a scientist. Ain't life grand?

 

Chris

[Conder101]

The calculations give you the thickness of the BLANK. The thickness of the finished RIM can be considerably greater. (Hence the reason why it is kind of foolish to talk about the thickness of a struck coin, it varies considerably depending upon where you measure it.)

 

But as to the nonsense about the five ounce coins being too thin to apply a lettered edge to that should obviously be false. My calculations put the thickness of the blank at 3.25 mm. The thickness of the rim of the struck coin will be even greater. If they can't letter that, then what is that stuff around the edge of the NA and president dollar coins? They aren't close to 3.25 mm (Blank for clad dollar coin is 1.65 mm, finished coin probably about 2 mm. They can letter a 2 mm thick coin but not one close to 4 mm thick?)

[astrostu]

Condor - I think I did actually qualify my initial post by stating I was doing this "to just do a quick estimate." I realize that a struck coin will be different, but I am a bit surprised that the math indicates that the striking raises the rim by ~25% on an ASE.

 

As for whether applying a letter to the edge is "nonsense" and "obviously ... false," here is what Ed Moy had to say about it, and to what I was referring originally:

 

Well, there isn’t a 5 ounce blank out there, so we had to get this custom made.

 

Then, because it was 3 inches in diameter, well we’ve got a 5 ounce piece of silver and we stretch it out to a 3 inch diameter, it’s paper thin. And then congress mandated that we had to edge letter it. So when you edge letter a paper thin coin, you get crumples. We went back to congress and said technically it isn’t possible, and they said we’ve got too many other things going on, you guys figure out how to do it. We’ve been technologically struggling to make this coin happen.

 

We’ve made some breakthroughs in it, where the edge lettering is not as deep or noticeable. But it now doesn’t mess up the rest of the coin now. That addresses the difficulty that we’re having with the coin. So, we’re having that difficulty, we’re just shooting to meet the legislative mandate making it a bullion coin for now. Really a bullion coin is bought by authorized purchasers. That’s the only way you can get them. And when we work out the kinks, we’ll consider making them a numismatic product out of them.

 

Maybe it's just me, but this could be explained by the coins being bigger. Think of it this way - you can easily break a long pieces of spaghetti, but it's much more difficult to break a shorter piece. So it may be easier for them to edge letter a 1" coin than one that's 3" with the same thickness.

[Conder101]

I believe Moy said that, I just don't believe he knows what he is talking about. I suspect it is more of an excuse because they don't want to do it and would rather the inscriptions be on the faces so they don't have to use two steps to create the coin.

 

Maybe there is a chance that the extra diameter might cause a distortion in the fields during the lettering, but if so maybe they should take a clue from the British pound coins and letter the edges first and then strike in a reeded collar. That would let the striking flatten the coin while the expansion into the reeds would prevent the crushing of the lettering. I also suspect that with the increased diameter we may see lower relief and the rims not raised to as great an extent.

 

One other thing of interest in the link you provided was his comment

The authorized, primarily as a bullion coin, although we can make them as a numismatic product.

I'd have to double check the legislation but I don't recall any provision that would permit striking them as a numismatic product. It strictly discussed them as a bullion product with distribution through the authorized bullion distributors and possibility of distribution through the national parks service.

[RWB]

They'll sell at the Park shops if accompanied by a tea cozy and spoon..

[Didz]

I like the designs on some of the coins I have seen thus far, so I would like to get a couple of these mainly because I like the looks of the coins. I personally could care less if its legal tender or not. I just hope I can figure out where to go to buy one or two of them. I really can't wait to get one of the vicksburg or gettysburg coins.

[bsshog40]

I like the designs on some of the coins I have seen thus far, so I would like to get a couple of these mainly because I like the looks of the coins. I personally could care less if its legal tender or not. I just hope I can figure out where to go to buy one or two of them. I really can't wait to get one of the vicksburg or gettysburg coins.

From what I've read, these are going to be issued thru the US Mint. They will not be considered as bullion and should be released as the regular size quarters are released. Also I guess they will be released at the date that the site became historical. As you can see in this link, the sites chosen and I'm presuming the dates that each one will be issued.

" The United States Mint will issue these quarters in the order in which the honored site was first established as a national site."

[DC Dawg]

One other thing of interest in the link you provided was his comment

The authorized, primarily as a bullion coin, although we can make them as a numismatic product.

I'd have to double check the legislation but I don't recall any provision that would permit striking them as a numismatic product. It strictly discussed them as a bullion product with distribution through the authorized bullion distributors and possibility of distribution through the national parks service.

Because the coin was added to Section 5112 of Title 31, it is a numismatic item.

 

Also according to Public Law 110-456 the specs on the coin are:

(A) have a diameter of 3.0 inches and weigh 5.0 ounces;

(B) contain .999 fine silver;

© have incused into the edge the fineness and weight of the bullion coin;

(D) bear an inscription of the denomination of such coin, which shall be ‘quarter dollar’; and

(E) not be minted or issued by the United States Mint as so-called ‘fractional’ bullion coins or in any size other than the size described in paragraph (A).

 

Scott

[DC Dawg]

Congress can mandate this stuff, but can't work together to solve national issues. Teddy Roosevelt's "square deal" it's not.

 

The current Speaker of the House makes one nostalgic for Joe Cannon who was one of TR’s contemporaries. And no, Joe was not a good guy, but at least he is now a part of history, and we now know that he did ruin the country.

 

Bill... now that you've made your politics clear, let me remind you that Public Law 110-456 was originally introduced 6/4/2008 by Rep. Michael Castle, the R-E-P-U-B-L-I-C-A-N representative from Delaware as H.R.6184. Rep. Castle also introduced the bill that eventually became the 50 States Quarters Program.

 

I would suggest getting your facts in order prior to making political pronouncements, especially in a venue like on these forums where there are many informed individuals.

 

Scott

[Conder101]

Well I went through Public Law 110-456, and all of title 31 Sec 5112 and Sec 5132, Sec 5134, and Sec 5136 and I can't find any authorization for producing and selling proof version of this coin. Interestingly enough I can't find authorization for producing proof silver or gold eagles either. I did find the authorization for the production of the regular and silver proof sets of the cent through dollar coins. and specific mention of authorization to produce proof NA dollars to whatever level the director finds appropriate.

 

The designating of the coins as being numismatic items is just so hat profits from their sale will be earmarked as going into the Numismatic Enterprise Fund.