1974/75 Aluminum Lincoln Cent

[numisnovice-migration]

I know of the two confirmed 1974 aluminum cents, the Toven Specimin and the one in the Smithsonian, but are there any from 1975 that have been confirmed to be genuine? Also, are there many known forgeries of these pieces out there? There were supposedly at least 66 pressed but I'm not sure if the Mint has ever said what became of these pieces.

[WaxonWaxov]

Why the spoon did they make aluminum cents?

 

Were they considering moving from Copper to Aluminum?

[numisnovice-migration]

yeah, the price of copper in 1973 was rising and it looked like it was going to cost more than 1 cent to make a 1 penny. they were looking for different alternatives and struck almost 1.6 million aluminum pennies in 1974 but the cost of copper went down and almost all of them were melted down. they also struck a few in 75 for some reason.

[gedis3]

Why the spoon did they make aluminum cents?

 

Were they considering moving from Copper to Aluminum?

 

Correct. Mint experiments gone wild.

[numisnovice-migration]

are these frequently faked or counterfeited? or even reproduced as souvenirs or anything?

[WoodenJefferson]

The only ones I know of are the 74's handed out to Congressmen to examine...they were subsequently re-called, two were not returned one was lost, suposedly on the steps to the House of Representatives.

 

The 75's are pure speculation...only internal Mint employee's would know.

[richbeat]

According to David Lange, after an internal audit, two of the aluminum cents struck with dies dated 1975 (from a press run of 58 coins on May 28, 1974) are unaccounted for.

[Conder101]

In 1973 the price of copper was approaching $1.54 per pound at which point the copper in the cent would be worth the same as the face value of the coin. Legislation was passed that allowed the Secretary of the Treasury to alter the composition of the cent on his own authority without the approval (This was done so if copper made a sudden jump up he could make the change immediately without having to wait for the slow grinding of the wheels of government to approve the change.)

 

The mint conducted several tests at the time with different compositions trying to to come up with a substitute. Apparently only two compositions received serious consideration, aluminum and copper clad steel. Full production runs of over a million and a half coins of both aluminum and copper clad steel cents dated 1974 were struck in mid 1974. (The future date was selected because the officials were sure one or the other would be selected and if so the test pieces could then just be released into circulation with the regular coins during the following year.)

 

The mint decided that the aluminum would be the metal of choice and at a meeting of the Congressional Subcommittee on Coinage the Mint distributed examples of the aluminum cents to the subcommittee to show what the new coins would look like.

 

But then the price of copper fell dramaticly and it was apparent there was no immediate need to change the composition and the idea was dropped. The Mint then requested the return of the aluminum cents from the subcommittee mambers for destruction. All but 12 specimens were returned. Eventually one of the 12 was found by a Congessional aide in an outgoing Congessmans desk drawer and reather than turning it over to the mint, the aide sent it to the Smithsonian for preservation. That is the source of the coin in the national collection. Then there is the Toven specimen which was supposedly given to a Capital security guard after he saw a Congressman drop it and he tried to return it to him.

 

There have been some unconfirmed reports of other specimens having been found in rolls but none have been publicly displayed for fear of confiscation. The mint has admitted more recently that since they ran the production run tests on a regular press used for striking circulation coins (They just took a press out of service, changed the dies and then ran a hopper of aluminum planchets through it, and a hopper of copper clad steel. Then they changed the dies again and returned the press to service.)

 

So there was a possibility that experimental planchets or coins could have gotten stuck in the press during the test runs and then later gotten mixed into the production coins. Still the govenment takes the position that this didn't happen and any aluminum cents are the property of the government.

 

The existance of the 1974 copper clad steel coins was a bettter kept secret and they did not become known until 1984 when several specimens were sent to Coin World by a former steel foundry worker who reported that in late 1974 Treasury officials came to the foundry where they then dumped several large bags of coins into one of the melts. One bag burst open and thousands of coins fell out on the ground. The officilas gathered them up and put them into the melt as well. After they left the worker found several specimens that the officials had missed during their cleanup. The copper plated steel cents were struck from the same pair of dies used to strike the Smithsonian aluminum cent.

 

In 1974 the mint for some reason struck 15 1975 dated aluminum cents. Possibly just as continuing tests? All 15 of those were destroyed.

 

Interesting, I wasn't aware of Lange's report, and I hadn't heard of any of the 1975 aluminums being missing.

[Zoins]

In 1973 the price of copper was approaching $1.54 per pound at which point the copper in the cent would be worth the same as the face value of the coin. Legislation was passed that allowed the Secretary of the Treasury to alter the composition of the cent on his own authority without the approval (This was done so if copper made a sudden jump up he could make the change immediately without having to wait for the slow grinding of the wheels of government to approve the change.)

Nice info Conder. We sure have come a long way from when coins were designed to be worth their metal content.

[DC Dawg]

Why the spoon did they make aluminum cents?

 

Were they considering moving from Copper to Aluminum?

The Mint is now looking into new metals for the cent because of the price of zinc. The company that makes the planchets for the Canadian cents has been lobbying the Mint and congress for a copper covered aluminum or stell cent. The current composition of the Canadian cent is .940 steel, .045 copper, and .015 nickel.

 

Athough it has not been part of the rumor mill, I suspect the same company has been trying to lobby for a change in the composition of the nickel. For reference, the Canadian 5 cents coin is made from .945 steel, .035 copper, and .02 nickel. Changing the nickel would be more problematic. Changing the metals would change the electromagnetic signature of the coin and that would force a change in vending machines to recognize the change.

 

Scott

[Zoins]

The easiest thing to do would be to eliminate the cent and nickel. No vending machine changes would be necessary!

[jesbroken]

Great post Conder. Very informative, This was an issue that I knew nothing about nor had ever heard of it. thanks to Numisnovice for initiating the post.

Jes

[DC Dawg]

The easiest thing to do would be to eliminate the cent and nickel. No vending machine changes would be necessary!

Not very easy to do when some vending machines sell 80-cent or 90-cent items. Inserting quarters and dime(s) requires change. Otherwise, the prices will be raised and you, the consumer, looses!

 

Scott

[Zoins]

The easiest thing to do would be to eliminate the cent and nickel. No vending machine changes would be necessary!

Not very easy to do when some vending machines sell 80-cent or 90-cent items. Inserting quarters and dime(s) requires change. Otherwise, the prices will be raised and you, the consumer, looses!

There's a price for everything. The question is will people be willing to pay that price. I hardly ever use vending machines so I personally won't lose that much but may gain something through lower government expenses. Yes the Mint is a profit center, but they could be making an even bigger profit!

[DC Dawg]

There's a price for everything. The question is will people be willing to pay that price. I hardly ever use vending machines so I personally won't lose that much but may gain something through lower government expenses. Yes the Mint is a profit center, but they could be making an even bigger profit!

Interestingly, the Mint is one of the best run "profit centers" in the government. Sure, they have customer service problems, but they are a very efficient organization.

 

A way to maximize the profits... stop printing $1 bills, 90-percent of which are printed to replace worn notes. Stop minting the half-dollar, it's not being used. Make the smallest currency the $5 note. Use the same planchets from the half-dollar to make $2 coins. Reduce the costs of replacing the $1 note every 18 months and make more profit on a $2 coin. If necessary, quiet the critics by issuing a steel or aluminum cent coated with a thin layer of copper. Then, only the nickel would cost more than face value and reduce the impact of the costs.

 

I don't want to hear "but the people don't want it." The people don't want the BRAVO-SIERRA at the airport either. But circumstances warranted those changes and Americans just dealt with it. They can deal with a currency change, too. It's not rocket science!

 

Scott

[cladking]

It's impossible to eliminate the nickel without also eliminating the dime or quarter since it will not be possible to make change.

 

The designs of the 1974 cents were changed midway through the year to fascilitate striking them in aluminum. This is a common but extremely overlooked variety. All three mint set coins (P,D& S) are the large date variety so the small dates are much more difficult to find in very high grade.

 

One of these days it will be realized that the '74-S sm dt is a tough coin in truly choice condition.

[Conder101]

Use the same planchets from the half-dollar to make $2 coins.

The general public couldn't tell the 2.2 mm larger and 30% heavier SBA from a quarter and they got upset over the possible loss of 75 cents. You want to make a $2 coin the exact same size, weight and color of a 50 cent piece so they can lose $1.50? They are really going to love that.

 

The designs of the 1974 cents were changed midway through the year to fascilitate striking them in aluminum.

Why would they do that when the Aluminum tests were done using 1974 dies in 1973 and the use of aluminum had been rejected before 1974 ever began. I know they changed the designs in mid 1974, but I can't see it being to facilitate the striking of aluminum.

[DC Dawg]

Use the same planchets from the half-dollar to make $2 coins.

The general public couldn't tell the 2.2 mm larger and 30% heavier SBA from a quarter and they got upset over the possible loss of 75 cents. You want to make a $2 coin the exact same size, weight and color of a 50 cent piece so they can lose $1.50? They are really going to love that.

Conder... you forgot the beginning part of this where I said to eliminate the half-dollar. No half-dollar, no confusion!

 

Personally, I would rather see a multi-sided coin, like the Canadian Loonie, or even a bi-metalic coin like the Canadian Twonie. That would make the coin stand out!

 

Scott

[Conder101]

Conder... you forgot the beginning part of this where I said to eliminate the half-dollar. No half-dollar, no confusion!{/quote]

You going to go out around the country and round up all of those hundreds of millions of clad half dollars that the government put out for thirty years before you start making your two dollar coins? Because if you don't, they will get spent as $2 pieces. I mean if I'm sitting on a hoard of a couple hundred half dollars and they start making a $2 coin the exact same size, weight, and color I'm probably going to start trying to pass some along, slip them into rolls, and if the set the vending machines to take the new $2 coins I'll have a field day with 50 cent coins that the machine can't tell from twos.

 

See my point. You CAN'T have two different coins of the same size but widely different values without having problems.

[cladking]

Why would they do that when the Aluminum tests were done using 1974 dies in 1973 and the use of aluminum had been rejected before 1974 ever began. I know they changed the designs in mid 1974, but I can't see it being to facilitate the striking of aluminum.

 

I can't recall the source. I do recall the claim that there were a few problems with the striking of the aluminum coins which were thought would be cleared up by the changes. Lange reports that the aluminums were struck in January, 1974 but he might have meant they were done by then.

 

You're no doubt right so it's entirely possible that the source was mistaken. This was though, a pretty significant change mid-year.