Talk:Penny (Canadian coin)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of the WikiProject Numismatics, which is an attempt to facilitate the categorization and creation of accurate and formal Numismatism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join and see a list of open tasks to help with.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.

if it's 95% steel and nickel, why doesn't it stick to a magnet? Kwantus 14:57, 2005 May 7 (UTC)

last time I checked, copper pennies didn't stick to magnets, steel ones do. Jeff 5:21, 2005 Oct 7 (UTC)

According to the Mint's website, current pennies (2000-) are "94% steel, 1.5% nickel, 4.5% copper plating or copper-plated zinc". The Haxby & Willey guide Coins of Canada, 2003 edition makes no mention of circulation pennies made using steel, just copper-plated zinc. Plus, I can't find any recent pennies that do stick to magnets, leading me to believe that circulation pennies are the zinc ones. Aottley 21:47, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Steel content

My 2000- pennies also don't stick to magnets. Can we please find out the truth and get this fixed while I find my tin-foil hat. --RedACE 02:48, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

After some more googling I found an article [1] which describes which pennies are magnetic. Pennies from 2003-2004 with a (p) under the Queen's head are made of steel and therefore magnetic. I tested with a lot of pennies I had and found one with a (p) under the head -- it was magnetic. Still need to do more research... --RedACE 03:11, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
All of the coins with a (P) under the head are steel plated, most others are not Blacknail 20:47, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Metal Content Incorrect?

After playing around with a Plumbers Torch (which is hot enough to melt zinc, but not copper or steel) and a small magnet (sticks to steel but not copper or zinc). I have found the following while testing 10 coins from each year (1997 to 2006).

Canadian Penny base metals 1997-2006
1997 9 Zinc, 1 copper
1998-2002 Zinc
2003 8 Steel 2 Zinc
2004 2 Steel 8 Zinc
2005-2006 Zinc

A large rock 04:58, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Value of metal content

I removed the link to the anti-penny campaign - although a link to some anti-penny campaign might be appropriate, that particular one contains the misleading claim that the metal content of the coin is worth 1.25 cents. Current metal prices are available from [2] (steel) and [3] (copper and nickel); those pages quote US$649 per metric tonne for the most expensive type of steel they quote, and US$3.4689 and US$9.1248 per pound for copper and nickel respectively, which (with the composition and weight given in the article) works out to Can$0.0033 per coin. The removed link was probably basing the calculation on an assumption of pure copper, which would work out to Can$0.018 per coin (it may have been closer to $0.0125 when it was written - copper has been rising). We should be more accurate.129.97.79.144 17:43, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I remember hearing the 1.25c thing on a news report, but they said that it was the cost of producing a penny; the only coin that cost more to produce than it was worth. The report went on to state however that the penny would not disappear, since the Mint took the view that producing the entire run of a year's coinage cost far less than the coins' face value, so there was a "net profit". They also discussed the financial impact of the loss of the penny: calculation of thins such as sales tax would most likely be rounded up to the nearest nickel, stores would lose revenue because any item with a price of $1.99, for example, would either have to lower the price to $1.95 (and lose 4c per item) or raise the price to $2.00 (and lose the psychological effect of having a price of "less than $2"). I wish I could find a reference for it. --SigPig 08:46, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
The US penny does cost around 1.25 cents per penny, could that be the confusion? At any rate, the rounding isn't an issue. There's no reason you couldn't still have $1.99 even if there was no actual penny. Rounding isn't an issue until the total, and only if you pay in cash Nik42 08:50, 2 August 2006 (UTC)


I need to see the special coins! I'm a collector you know!

http://www.coinflation.com/canada/ shows current metal value of Canadian coins. The steel ones are not currently included though.--Eloil 06:10, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Update Picture

The current picture shows a 2005 penny. Is there a way this can be improved? 70.73.77.83 16:08, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it's particularly important that the image show the current year as long as the design is current. Since 2006 pennies have had the new RCM logo mintmark though, so it would be good to change the image to show this.--Eloil 05:54, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Status of the old Large Cents?

I know the Canadian Mint began removing the old large cents (1920 and earlier) from circulation begining in Nov. 1937, but what is their status today? Are they still legal tender? Were they demonetisized? (however you spell that word) If I took the two large cents I have to a bank in Canada could I get two modern pennys? - Not that I would mind you, I'm just curious. Thank You. Gecko G 09:54, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Maple Leaf on the Coin not a Maple

Dont have a reference for this but I do have some botanical understanding. One of the characters of the maple family, Acer is to have opposite leaf attachment, which means 2 leaves come off the node (stem) at exactly the same location ie side by side. This is consistant for all members of the maple family regardless of species. The image depicted on the penny is of alternate leaf attachment and thus cannot possibly be a maple. It is likely an artist making a mistake to better fit the leaves onto the coin, without knowledge of the Acer family in my opinion and not some other tree species depicted though it could be possible as well.--205.200.226.35 (talk) 09:01, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the twig is anatomically incorrect but it is supposed to be a maple. Kruger Gray did not know that such symmetry was impossible in natural maple leaves. Gecko G (talk) 06:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC)