From 1981 onward - Uncirculated Sets

General discussions on RCM Products.
KellyB
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2021 11:53 am

From 1981 onward - Uncirculated Sets

Post by KellyB » Sun Jan 16, 2022 3:22 pm

Good Afternoon,

In 1981 and onward the Mint produced Set of the following qualities: " Proof" "Specimen" "Uncirculated". The uncirculated sets replaced the proof-like sets.

Since there are no proof-like sets from 1981 and onward but only uncirculated sets, why does Coins and Canada have grading for PL in 1981 and onward.

I would think these "uncirculated sets" would be "business strikes - not circulated". And would be of an MS if determined.

the mint does state: "uncirculated" but never mentions that the coins have been double struck. If the coins are double struck...where can this information be found at the mint site. Or documented somewhere.

Appreciate input in this area of my concern.

Thank you.

Kelly

TBH
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 12:09 am
Location: sunshine coast BC

Re: From 1981 onward - Uncirculated Sets

Post by TBH » Sun Jan 16, 2022 4:42 pm

The uncirculated sets replaced the proof-like sets.
Where did you get that information?
It is absolutely incorrect.
The proof-like sets were produced until 2010.
The mint never ever called the PL sets anything but "uncirculated " sets.
The name PL was coined by Charlton and it stuck with Canadian collectors.
PL coins were never double struck.

KellyB
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2021 11:53 am

Re: From 1981 onward - Uncirculated Sets

Post by KellyB » Sun Jan 16, 2022 5:43 pm

Thank you for your reply.

Coins of Canada By J.A. Haxby & R.C. Willey 37th Edition 2019. Page 568.

Here back soon.

Kelly

KellyB
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2021 11:53 am

Re: From 1981 onward - Uncirculated Sets

Post by KellyB » Sun Jan 16, 2022 5:48 pm

PL (Proof-like): Special coins struck at the Mint with a brilliant relief is struck on a brilliant field and not intended for circulation despite the fact that their composition is identical to the coins produced for circulation. If Proof-like coins have been removed from their protective envelope or original package, it is harder to differentiate them from uncirculated coins. Proof-like coins are struck up to two times on numismatic presses. Also called Brilliant uncirculated (BUNC).

Can you tell me which RCM coins would fall under this description? An example would help.

KellyB
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2021 11:53 am

Re: From 1981 onward - Uncirculated Sets

Post by KellyB » Sun Jan 16, 2022 8:24 pm

To conclude I think I have answered my question: See below: This was a quote back in the Coin Community in 2015.

Now it states: 1967/68 and back. Not 1981. Can change, when the top dogs feel like it. The best way is to categorized these coins 1969 and forward as MS-NC. and note where a particular coin came from. i.e. non-circulated set.

"There is a certain amount of debate, politics, uncertain record keeping and so on involved. Personal opinion, Charlton tends to go with the best information available at the time, sometimes makes mistakes, and updates accordingly when the consensus moves. As you say, it can be confusing as you tend to assume these things were all fixed in advance whereas in fact they, and our understanding of them, have evolved and continue to evolve over time. Minting wasn't always the modern, 4 decimal points defined, computer controlled environment that it is today and collectors didn't have access to information the way they do today. The mint was in the business of producing circulation coins and collector coins was just a recently developed minor side line in the 50s, 60s & 70s; not the big business it is today. So in 2002 the tendency was to call the change from PL to BU/NBU/MS NC as of 1980/1. Today it's called as of 1967/8. Maybe new evidence will come to light from old RCM paper records or whatever and the nomenclature and/or date range will get changed again."

In my opinion I think the PL category should be changed to MS-NC. or one of the above. You probably think am crazy! but would make things a lot easier for a lot of people of young new collector's coming on board. which is what you want.

Let Charlton go down in history as coining the phrase "Proof-like" in 1953 was describing a a 1953 set. Sets from 1969 and up I would not coin this phrase with these sets.

My Opinion. Kelly

troubadour
Posts: 349
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2016 3:46 pm

Re: From 1981 onward - Uncirculated Sets

Post by troubadour » Tue Jan 18, 2022 9:55 am

To me PL refers to a finish not a word on a RCM package.

SP67
Posts: 60
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2021 11:01 am

Re: From 1981 onward - Uncirculated Sets

Post by SP67 » Tue Jan 18, 2022 10:36 am

There is lot of confusion between all different surface finish, especially with the proof-like.

As mentioned earlier, PL is never used by the MRC. They always use “uncirculated set”. PL is more related to the collectors definition.

Early PL sets were struck twice until mid-70s. I don’t know for the 80’s. So is quite easy to see the difference with PL and MS.

BU (Bright uncirculated) is not related to PL set or any other surface finish. It’s an old description of low-grade Mint State (Typ. MS-63).

More than that, the PL definition is completely different in USA.

The confusion is worse. On a regular base, MRC is changing the way they call their entry level sets and the related manufacturing method. It’s now quite difficult to see difference between coins from Uncirculated Set and High Grade MS.

Finally, the certification services call the PL coin in different ways (PL, UNC, Numismatic BU, ect…). They are all equivalent.

The tricky part is to recognize PL (or NBU) coin from MS coin. Not always easy with recent coins.

dbcoins
Posts: 37
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2015 3:02 pm

Re: From 1981 onward - Uncirculated Sets

Post by dbcoins » Thu Jan 20, 2022 10:08 am

Some good points and observations above. But as noted, this is part of the reason this hobby has trouble getting young people & new collectors in general. Too convoluted a system.....uncirculated, brilliant uncirculated, numismatic brilliant uncirculated, proof-like, proof, specimen, etc.... I saw a slabbed coin recently that was PCGS graded " MS64 + " . What on earth does that mean ??? Either the coin qualifies as MS65 or it does not. Issuing in between " + " grades now on a single point difference ?..Really ?
Stay safe

User avatar
CanuckCoinGirl
Posts: 67
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2022 6:41 pm

Re: From 1981 onward - Uncirculated Sets

Post by CanuckCoinGirl » Mon May 02, 2022 6:02 pm

Regardless of what collectors or book writers indicate, for the RCM, there is no such thing as Proof-Like coins. The RCM indicates that they are only uncirculated and their uncirculated (or Brilliant Uncirculated, which is the term they do use) are no different than what is found in your pocket based on their production techniques. The benefit of cellophane packaging from the start keeps them untouched, but does not magically make them different. A sandwich brought to your table wrapped in film is not more gourmet than one brought on a plate without film because someone couldn't touch it, nor is it made differently. The packaging allows the RCM to have 'sets' for collectors, gifts, and nice objects for sale - mementos and special things - the premium price for them is not a result of having a different coin, but that they are packaged and value added is from the packaging.

There is the information on 1953 sets - the rare and odd set of coins packaged in paper holders. New dies were created for 1953 with the new Elizabeth Obverse coins and the RCM started seeing the value in producing more than the custom sets they had before. A number of the Mint Sets being sold by the RCM appear to have gotten a mix of coins, but mostly the sets are the business strike. Colonial Acres Auction House has a photo of the 'rare' type 1953 Mint Set that appears to have led to the the Proof-Like term, and there are a few others floating around, but the images look like some BU and Proof coins made it to the cardboard holders together. Generally, or more correctly -unfortunately, the PL term has been used for all the sets that were going to become more common with increase mintage from 1954 onward, which were untouched standard business strikes (with the RCM really starting its new enterprise of becoming a maker of coins for collectors and gift givers).

Proof-Like is a term that has been applied to the RCM coins, despite the process used indicating that it should not be. Let's be clear, the RCM does not use the term PL, and it really isn't correct for any of the uncirculated sets, with the 1953 exception. The uncirculated packaged coins are not added to rolls or moved, so they may have fewer marks on the rims and surfaces that are obvious, which collectors are quick to look for on really lovely uncirculated coins, but even these uncirculated coins can have marking from each other, being stacked, etc.. They should not have wear because of how they are packaged and, thus, should always be in mint state until removed from the film or touched directly. That said, the film is permeable and toning is possible. It's time to stop using PL for Canadian sets. Some years, the coins just look more stunning than other years because of the metals or the surface the images used. The uncirculated coins are part of overall circulation mintage.

Good quality die and the lack of fingers can leave the finishes lovely. These coins are not double struck intentionally. Any double strikes to the uncirculated sets that have been noted result from the same random errors that occur with what we see in circulated coins. Fast double strikes create errors in coins that can make them worth more for the circulation styles. For actual Proof coins with the mirror finish and textured relief, the die is polished and coins are double struck at low speeds to avoid movement of the blanks. Some of this information has morphed into descriptions of the PL coins, but is not how the RCM made their business strike coins. These actual Proof coins and some other RCM coins look different than the Brilliant Uncirculated and circulated coins (the latter two being the same) we might expect to see. Proof coins are carefully reviewed and errors should be removed prior to the packaging.

In 2020 the RCM released an uncirculated packaged set of stunning quarters - Numis-tastic - highlighting their only finishes: BU, SPECIMEN, PROOF, Reverse PROOF, and Matte PROOF. The RCM no longer can sell Numis-tastic sets directly, but Canadian coin dealers may still have some of these. They are lovely. Of course they have coloured coins, glow in the dark coins, relief, etc, that are built on these basic finishes. Different metals can also be used, which leads to different looks, but are still based on the same production processes.

The RCM has updated their website information and it is excellent on their productions for coin collectors.
https://www.mint.ca/store/mint/learn/th ... s-10600012 Here there is a video and details - and even discussion of the cellophane packaging. If you have not been to the RCM in Winnipeg or Ottawa, a tour is good- and there are virtual tours now too.

Bill in Burl
Posts: 1131
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 7:41 am
Location: Golden Horseshoe, ONT

Re: From 1981 onward - Uncirculated Sets

Post by Bill in Burl » Mon May 02, 2022 6:20 pm

The way that I understand it, it was Charlton that started the term PL. It's been used for well over 50 years, so no matter how many articles come out explaining what the DID or DIDN'T do, the PL term will be used for decades more, correct or incorrect..
Bill in Burl

User avatar
CanuckCoinGirl
Posts: 67
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2022 6:41 pm

Re: From 1981 onward - Uncirculated Sets

Post by CanuckCoinGirl » Mon May 02, 2022 6:31 pm

Yes... but it was not correct to do so. Just because it's been done that way for a long time, doesn't mean it should continue. Proof-like is a term that is good for the US minted coins, because there are actually PL coins. This also encourages the incorrect term. There are good reasons to see this corrected from now on. Mostly because there isn't such thing as a PL coin from the RCM.

Bill in Burl
Posts: 1131
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 7:41 am
Location: Golden Horseshoe, ONT

Re: From 1981 onward - Uncirculated Sets

Post by Bill in Burl » Tue May 03, 2022 6:28 am

I agree that it's incorrect and agree with you, but it will be hard to kill something that has been around for decades and decades.
Bill in Burl

User avatar
CanuckCoinGirl
Posts: 67
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2022 6:41 pm

Re: From 1981 onward - Uncirculated Sets

Post by CanuckCoinGirl » Tue May 03, 2022 3:15 pm

Then we best start quick.... and also cut off other coins being labeled this way.

I can't find it right now, but I had seen something about First strikes being treated the same way. In the US first strikes are maybe not so rigorously dealt with, but Canada's first strikes are circulation coins, separated immediately, and added to first strike rolls. They are not 'different' from circulation coins, but taken from the front end, with the new dies

Bill in Burl
Posts: 1131
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 7:41 am
Location: Golden Horseshoe, ONT

Re: From 1981 onward - Uncirculated Sets

Post by Bill in Burl » Wed May 04, 2022 11:38 am

Well, take a look at the CCF site and see how many P/L designations people are talking about.
Bill in Burl

User avatar
CanuckCoinGirl
Posts: 67
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2022 6:41 pm

Re: From 1981 onward - Uncirculated Sets

Post by CanuckCoinGirl » Fri May 06, 2022 11:11 pm

only been a lurker there... so much information....
I did like that someone questioned the set Colonial Acres has up - one flipped coin...
BUT they do have a 1953 PL set in the cardboard - close to last item in the current auction, with a few years following.

Post Reply