Opinions on new 2003 Illinois quarter

[Guest]

Just got my rolls of Illinois quarters.

 

Seems like after the disaster of the Mississippi quarter, their trying a little harder.

 

The Illinois-p don't look good. The Illinois-d look better, IMHO

 

Any comments?

 

Is this the first U.S. coin with two different presidents on the coin?

[michael]

ugly designs like most all of the state quarters................

 

i like the horse rider on the reverse of the delaware? and that tree on the reverse of the mass.? quarters

 

sincerely michael

[PQSeated]

I'm going to put it plain and simple: Ugly!

[coppercoins-migration]

I don't see the "disaster" in the Mississippi quarter other than the fact that it was a bit on the cliche side. Other than that, it does have some of the better balance and design, artistically speaking, of all the designs to date.

 

Regarding the "other" nice design with the tree - that was Connecticut, and is still my artists' winner for the best design to date even though it is only a tree. Speaks out a bit for the other designs.

 

I haven't really had time to study the Illinois design closely, but from what I do remember, it's another one of the hodge-podge collages of "stuff" tossed together like someone took a state history book, ate it, then regurgitated it onto the coin. Nothing with "meaning". Just the cliche like Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, New York - shall I continue?

 

I am watching closely for some of the other states hoping they don't completely disappoint like many of the others have. I still say, after it's all said and done, the mint is going to forever kick themselves for two things:

 

1. Not giving the actual artists credit on the coins. In case you didn't know, the coins display the initials of the mint engraver, not the designing artist. This probably beset plenty of good artists who could have added greatly to the program, myself included.

 

2. Not trashing their stupid "flat design" policy for the single-squeeze die making technique and going back to the nice deeper designs we will eventually have to talk them into going back to if they want "collectible" coins in the future. We could have had a really nice program here - nice, deep relief designs that would glorify many of the better designs they've had to date, and would allow for much better designs on some of the not so good states. Imagine a set of 50 quarters that had relief like some of the older 50c commemoratives we've had in the past. A special matte proof issue of each in 90% silver...they really could have done a bang-up job if they had tried.

[cladking]

Certainly many of these designs to date have fallen well short of great art and good coin art looks much better when there is some relief to it. It seems though that the mint is doing an excellent job with their extremely limited resources and the short lead times for each change. It is far past time to eliminate their biggest job; the production of a coin that is a drain on the economy and a bane to the landscape! The elimination of the penny would free up much productive capacity and translate immediately into better quality for the coins that Americans actually need.

[GDJMSP]

Something that needs to be remembered regarding the relief on coins - the banks.

 

I agree that we could have better or higher relief than we do. But not only would the Mint have to contend with the higher cost to produce a higher relief coin - they would also have to withstand the onslaught from the banks. They would complain loud & long about the problems that higher relief coins create for them. It is only my opinion but I believe the banks are the primary reason we have coins with such low relief.

[GP_]

what kind of problems do high releif coins cause for banks?

[GDJMSP]

From what I have read their loudest complaints are in regard to stacking the coins, rolling the coins & counting the coins. Apparently the flatter a coin is - the more easily these things are accomplished. And since easy means cost savings - the banks favor very low relief coins.

[coinman1794]

I think the design is a little odd, but I also think its well balance and I think it's attractive in that regard. As for quality of the coins- terrible, as usual. Now, when refering to the quality at one mint over the other, it just depends on how fresh the dies were when they struck the batch of coins that yours came from, and how long each batch spent in a bin getting scratched.

[cladking]

Stacking used to be the preferred method for counting coins but is rarely used in banks any more. The coins had much more relief up until about 1994 though they started lowering it as early as 1973 or so. There are still some of the older coins in circulation with full relief and little wear so it can cause too big a problem for the banks.

[jtryka]

I saw an Illinois quarter at the coin show this weekend, didn't buy one for 50 cents, figured I wait and get one in change. The design is on par with the other ones, though I have an inherant bias since I am from Illinois, but I also hate the designs with outlines of the states.

 

As far as high relief causing problems for banks, I don't see it. Maybe there's something to it, and I know that was a complaint about HR Saints, but stacking $20 gold pieces is a little different than stacking quarters. I have a hard time believing the banks even care today, since 1) banks rarely stack coins anymore, they are either in a drawer loose, or they are in one of those plastic stacking trays, 2) Many banks don't even roll coins anymore, as a lot of this is now done at the 3rd party armored car companies like Brinks or Loomis Fargo, etc.3) Coinstar, which handles far more coins than any bank doesn't seem to have a problem, their machines accurately count the coins, and then they are verified by the armored car service by weight, so they aren't even counted by the armored service until they roll them, 4) The larger problems banks have is that coins, like $100 bills are cash, so they are a non-earning asset, and they also must reduce their borrowing limit at the Fed for the amount of cash they have. I would think that most banks are concerned with far greater challenges, like labor costs and non-performing loans than difficulty with the relief on coins. But, if you can provide some statements by bank executives to the contrary, then I would reconsider my position. Ultimately, this is just a way for the Mint to reduce costs and increase seignorige (not sure if I spelled that right). After all the group that makes the most money on coins is the Mint itself!

[davefperry]

High relief coins take a toll on the the dies and they don't last long. So the mint will still use cost effective dies.

Is Honest Abe the first person to be on two different circulating coins?

[GP_]

well I just went through the 2 rolls I got (hopefully that subscription is finnaly cancelled! cancelling an account does NOT cancel your subscriptions!)

 

Well the P mint sucked as usuall, every coin was greasy, but no struck throughs. The reeding was off center on all, and the quality poor. The stuff in the bank rolls is of better quality then the in the special mint rolls. I did find a die crack that makes Lincoln look like he is peeing, should make whackjob inc happy

 

The D mint had a much better strike, and the reeding was centered. Some were still greasy though.

 

So basically, I like the design, but the mint did their usuall poor job of making the coins.

[cladking]

The average die strikes about a quarter million coins and costs well under $200. With two dies per coin that works out to less than .16 cents per coin. Returning relief to where it was 10 years ago would cost around one tenth of one cent per coin. The question is what do we want to spend our money on. Twenty years ago they spent "extra" money for better coins, why not today?

[davefperry]

The govt. can pinch a penny but not with the proper die pressure. The mint seems to be trying harder with state quarter designs. They're looking at drawings from the state now instead of just reading descriptions. Maybe it'll help.