Take a look at the $2.5 Indian and $5 Indian gold coins... both have an incuse design which is pretty cool, but both of them certainly wear. They just wear a little differently
The distance is so small between the highest point and surface of a coin that even if you made coins the same distance in relief, the constant contact of being in circulation would still wear them down quite a bit. Granted, as illini420 said, the appearance of wear would be different, but it would still wear nonetheless.
Because they are different, many people have trouble grading the incuse Indian gold coins with consistency. But once you see enough of them and know what to look for, grading them isn't very difficult. The problem is that the grading companies themselves don't always grade them consistently which adds to the confusion and makes some collectors thing they are more difficult to grade than they really are. I've seen the same $5 Indians get graded AU58 by one company and then resubmitted to another company where it gets graded AU50. Lots of inconsistency out there in the AU grades on these.
Incuse lettering & numbers are used on several mint products, including the AtB quarters. Incused designs did not catch on and were stopped for circulating coins in the early 1900’s because it was believed the “crud” that builds up in the design could harbor disease.
Tim, if you are suggesting that the devices (bust, eagle, etc.) on the coins should be incuse, it would seem to me that the dies would wear out faster. It would be harder to push larger amounts of metal out of the central area of a planchet than to allow the metal to flow into it. Chris
the Swedes did this on the 1,2 and 5 ore coins between 1952 and 1971. the designs were kinda basic, probably to get around the die wear problem. But I have never seen one that has any noticeable wear.
I believe that I have read some criticism of the designs relating to stacking being a problem, but I have never found that to be the case. They stack fairly well and just about as well as any other coins in my experience. However, when stacking these the fields of each coin are pressed right up against each other and that contact causes marks. The repeated stacking of these coins is one of the reasons you see the fields often marked up and one of the reasons that very high grade examples are extremely rare. When thinking of these coins, one must remember that the coins that had mintmarks actually had the mintmark raised up above the field of the coin. Accordingly, the mintmark was one of the first parts of the coin to wear. I guess if you had a stack of these coins, all with mintmarks, it's possible that the raised up mintmarks may affect the stack of coins. When reading about the incuse gold designs, another contemporary criticism that comes up often relates to possible health risks of the new coins. Some believed that the incused design would trap dirt and germs much more so than traditional coins and have the potential to spread disease when used in commerce.
Silver is anti-fungal, anti-microbial and anti-viral. Pretty much nothing harmful can grow on silver. As for any germs on silver coins, ain't gonna happen. Alas, there are very few, if any, silver coins in circulation today.
I think another issue with incused designs was the dies did not last very long. It was ok for the softest metal, (gold), but if you use an incuse design on copper nickel it will get busted up pretty quickly.
Have you looked at the Switzerland 1, 2 and 5 Ore coins, from the early 1950s to the mid-1970s?? They have incuse devices on both sides, and are beautiful in mint state condition. Here is an example: http://www.ebay.ca/itm/Monnaie-Suede-Sweden-5-ore-1965-bronze-mc19623-/400713697429?
Interesting designs from Sweden indeed, but they don't do this any more; the last pieces with incuse design are from 1980 or so. That look always reminded me of the copper plåtmynten (plate money) from the 17th century ... Christian
