Home U.S. Coin Forum

1882 $3 Gold - Is it Real or Fake?

Hi everyone,

I've been trying to get better at recognizing the counterfeits on these $3 Gold Coins but some continue to stump me. What do you think of this 1882 - Real or Fake? (I am aware it has been cleaned - I am just concerned about Authenticity).


Comments

  • tommy44tommy44 Posts: 2,291 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited July 26, 2019 10:56AM

    Well worn which is unusual for a late date business strike $3 and the little ticky make above the re-cut 2 on the CoinFacts images and auction result images seems to be missing, so..... I'm not sure. It might just be because of wear or might be the pictures.

    it's crackers to slip a rozzer the dropsy in snide

  • MFeldMFeld Posts: 13,617 ✭✭✭✭✭

    My guess is that it’s an abused genuine example.

    Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.

  • lkeneficlkenefic Posts: 8,160 ✭✭✭✭✭

    wow... not my area at all, but it's an issue I'll likely have to revisit if/when I do the gold page for a type set. To my untrained eye it definitely looks cleaned/whizzed. There's too much detail missing to just be attributable to a poor strike. The one thing that disturbs me more are all the little micro hits in the fields... are any of them raised? I realize it's a difficult issue prompting many "Everyman" type collectors to look for a more circulated (re: affordable) piece... me included!

    Thanks for sharing!

    Collecting: Dansco 7070; Middle Date Large Cents (VF-AU); Box of 20;

    Successful BST transactions with: SilverEagles92; Ahrensdad; Smitty; GregHansen; Lablade; Mercury10c; copperflopper; whatsup; KISHU1; scrapman1077, crispy, canadanz, smallchange, robkool, Mission16, ranshdow, ibzman350, Fallguy, Collectorcoins, SurfinxHI, jwitten, Walkerguy21D, dsessom.
  • Insider2Insider2 Posts: 14,452 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @lkenefic said:
    wow... not my area at all, but it's an issue I'll likely have to revisit if/when I do the gold page for a type set. To my untrained eye it definitely looks cleaned/whizzed. There's too much detail missing to just be attributable to a poor strike. The one thing that disturbs me more are all the little micro hits in the fields... are any of them raised? I realize it's a difficult issue prompting many "Everyman" type collectors to look for a more circulated (re: affordable) piece... me included!

    Thanks for sharing!

    What you are seeing (hits) is jewelry damage. The relief is rounded and "fatty" due to polishing and wear. That'sone reason it looks fake.

  • FredWeinbergFredWeinberg Posts: 5,837 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Although 1882 is a very common counterfeit date
    for $3 golds, I believe, as posted by Mark, that it
    is genuine, but buffed for jewelry.

    The counterfeits have a 'flatter' date, denomination,
    etc.

    This one is good, imo, but obviously buffed

    Retired Collector & Dealer in Major Mint Error Coins & Currency since the 1960's.Co-Author of Whitman's "100 Greatest U.S. Mint Error Coins", and the Error Coin Encyclopedia, Vols., III & IV. Retired Authenticator for Major Mint Errors
    for PCGS. A 49+-Year PNG Member...A full numismatist since 1972, retired in 2022
  • zas107zas107 Posts: 831 ✭✭✭
    edited July 26, 2019 11:33AM

    I think it is fake personally. It doesn't have the lump above the 2 from the repunching of the date that all authentic 1882 business strikes bear.

  • PerryHallPerryHall Posts: 46,234 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The Omega Man counterfeit $3 is dated 1882. It had a tiny Greek letter omega inside the upper loop of the letter R in LIBERTY. Worth checking on this coin but you'll need good magnification.

    Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
    "Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
    "Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire

  • ashelandasheland Posts: 23,231 ✭✭✭✭✭

    After careful comparison, I too believe it's genuine, but the polished surfaces make it look terrible I'm afraid. I would wait for a problem free example.

  • sellitstoresellitstore Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Yes, the pebbled surface on this coin is typical of jewelry wear, not circulation wear.

    What does the edge look like? Any filed spots or solder?

    Collector and dealer in obsolete currency. Always buying all obsolete bank notes and scrip.
  • CaptHenwayCaptHenway Posts: 32,233 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Could not say for sure without seeing it in hand, and possibly not even then, but I lean towards counterfeit, ex-jewelry.

    I gave my first wife a counterfeit $3 in a necklace. When she died I melted all of her jewelry except for a ring that I gave her niece.

    Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
  • amwldcoinamwldcoin Posts: 11,269 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I'm not convinced either way without seeing it in hand...I'm @ 60% fake vrs. 40% abused genuine.

  • skier07skier07 Posts: 3,992 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited July 26, 2019 5:19PM

    Here’s a counterfeit 1882 $3 from the early 70’s. Look at the R on liberty.


  • blitzdudeblitzdude Posts: 5,961 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Looks fake to me. Congrats!!

    The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.
    BOOMIN!™

  • MFeldMFeld Posts: 13,617 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @blitzdude said:
    Looks fake to me. Congrats!!

    Why are you congratulating someone about a coin you think is “fake”?

    Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.

  • rickoricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The coin, though used as jewelry, looks authentic.... In hand examination would be advised.... Cheers, RickO

  • PerryHallPerryHall Posts: 46,234 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @CaptHenway said:
    Could not say for sure without seeing it in hand, and possibly not even then, but I lean towards counterfeit, ex-jewelry.

    What do you see on this coin that that makes you lean towards counterfeit.

    Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
    "Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
    "Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire

  • CaptHenwayCaptHenway Posts: 32,233 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Just gut feeling.

    Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
  • Insider2Insider2 Posts: 14,452 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @CaptHenway said:
    Just gut feeling.

    My gut feeling when I opened the discussion was fake also. It looks counterfeit! I talked myself out of it and am going with the genuine folks. Coins in this condition (jewelry) should always be seen in hand under a stereoscope. :)

  • Insider2Insider2 Posts: 14,452 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited July 28, 2019 6:49AM

    @CaptHenway said:
    Just gut feeling.

    LOL, I'm on a computer with better resolution and just for the fun of it, I enlarged the OP's image. I now agree with Tom, the piece is probably fake. The letters are too "fatty" and it is not from polishing.

    PS There is something uncanny about "gut" impressions.

    PS For those folks who have never had to put their reputation on the line with an opinion, there are many cases where we go back and forth on a coin - good, not good! Our only opinion that actually counts is when the coin leaves the office.

  • stevebensteveben Posts: 4,616 ✭✭✭✭✭

    i think it's fake. the date doesn't look right...there's a lot about the coin that looks suspicious. definitely looks like a ex-jewelry piece.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file