Is this $5 gold liberty proof like?
ksuscott
Posts: 277 ✭✭✭
I'm definitely a novice when it comes to proof like pre-1933 gold. I purchased this coin recently and the fields appear to have mirrored qualities. Would this be considered semi-proof like or proof like? I've included a link with a video. I apologize for the poor lighting.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AyQP3MhdsIi1NpCKu9-mAPeQBeV7xfXl/view?usp=sharing
0
Comments
Nice video! It looks to have prominent die polish lines, which I think are more characteristic of semi-proof like luster. Pretty piece of old gold either way!
No. Die polish doesn’t necessarily mean PL. Most PL coins from this era don’t show heavy die polish lines.
Also there is too much mint frost.
Nice coin!
No.
The coin in the OP is counterfeit unfortunately.
Upon what basis do you say that?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Looks quite real from what I can see.
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
I agree, though as some others have stated, it does not look PL.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
No
Latin American Collection
I would say, not proof like, though a nice coin.....Looks authentic to me... @stealer please provide detail so I can learn. Gold is my favorite, so I am interested in details here. Cheers, RickO
Since you read the statement on the internet you know it must be true!
To my non-professional eye, it looks real... but not PL.
Nice piece though!
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.
Authentic and nice coin!
Something looked off to me with it as well, but my main focus is with the $2 1/2 Indians, so I cannot say for sure. Reverse denticals look iffy to me, as do the stars. But if it is real, no, not PL.
Every one on coinfacts has a lot thicker rim. The one in question looks like a wire edge it's so thin. Here is a genuine AU55 to compare.
Getting the P-L designation on a coin is difficult. Even when it appears that it should be considered, you seldom seem to get it, except for some Morgan Silver Dollars. Unfortnnately the OP coin is not even close.
I have to say, you’ve got me questioning my original (genuine) opinion. I’d sure like to be able to see the coin in hand.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
i coin does not look proof like, but it is a nice looking coin!
Sorry, forgot to qualify that I do not do gold much at all, but I do a fair amount of buying and selling of raw T$ and seeing counterfeits of all varieties is part of the job. My previous statement wasn't meant to be interpreted as coming from a position of perfect knowledge.
To me, as @jwitten pointed out, the details of the dentils and rim look off and oddly chewed up. The texture on the face and neck of Liberty looks way off (gut feeling). The feathers of the eagle are really sharp relative to the overall mushy appearance of the coin. Finally, the surfaces just look like something you would see on a low quality counterfeit (which could just be PL-ish nature), but it just looks like reminiscent of a tin foil gold coin.
@stealer Your comments had me concerned as well. I took this coin to my local jewelry shop that also buys and sells coins. They have the gun that tests the metal content. The gold content appears to be correct based on their test.
>
If that's the case why wouldn't you say something like "something looks off to me with it"? Why instead declare it a certain fake with no explanation?
Sorry that's just one of my pet peeves. A statement that something is fake should always be followed by exactly why it's the case if you do indeed know for sure. If you don't know for sure then don't make it seem so.
Okay my apologies, I was up late reading research papers on generative ML models to synthesize new research directions and I was tired. Crucify me for not thinking of better diction in the moment and forgetting to qualify my statement in a non-legal setting.
As 291fifth said: "Since you read the statement on the internet you know it must be true!"
Correct gold content does not mean genuine. I still say there is a chance it is a counterfeit. Check out the rims compared to genuine pieces.
Intestesting Coin Week article about counterfeit five dollar gold pieces. https://coinweek.com/counterfeits/counterfeit-coin-detection-liberty-half-eagles/
You've got me leaning towards counterfeit also.
fortunately the op was good enough to upload large quality images.
you can click the coin image once it opens.
edited to add:
it needs to be a die transfer coin as it has the same "gouge" or doubling on the top of the I in liberty, due east.
I don't see this gouge/doubling on I of LIBERTY.
The two coins do not appear to use the same obverse die or reverse die state:
1. @kuscott coin has 1 in date centered over a dentil.
CoinFacts coin has 1 in date centered over a gap between dentils.
2. @kuscott coin does not have die crack joining F UNI
CoinFacts coin has die crack joining F UNI
Note: there are likely several obverse and reverse dies used, so a die match is
not required for a genuine coin.
Agree with yosclimber. Different dies were used to strike these coins and they can't be expected to be
exactly identical. I think both coins are real.
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
i think there are a few flags with the coin in the op. i agree with the overall look being suspect. comparing side-by-side high grade examples with this one shows a typical "mushiness" to use the word from the article about the ngc coins.
here is the gouge which i was referring to and appears on ALL of the coins i viewed but not saying it is on all of them as a basic study of the reverses for 82p $5 show at the least a few reverse dies. the die crack patterns and placement support this.
The "D" in united has a "gouge" or "crack" and is a common place for the 82p $5 but the one on the op coin varies greatly from the typical ones seen and one could argue it is what a small die crack could look like from a transfer die.
we on this forum have been mistaken before but this coin is concerning enough to warrant further examination. imho.
i'm not saying this gouge means anything other than either it proves the coin in the op to be authentic or to be from transfer dies.
@ksuscott
please don't take these posts as any type of attack on you or your character. i know the people posting in this thread fairly well and our goal is to learn, share, assist, have a good time and try to protect other members. this is not the first time we have delved down into a coin(s) authenticity as i think we take it upon ourselves and not with ulterior or negative motives to do so. to some extent i'd say the experienced members have some level of obligation to share various types of information from time to time; at least that is how i feel and do make some posts sometimes i'd really rather not but feel a responsibility to do so and sometimes it is not with any pleasure.
not sure what you think about the whole thing but if you have anything to say/add, please do so.
i personally discounted how important it may be to offer some kind words when someone posts a coin they are exited about/seeking information and only to have the coin called into question but rest assured the vast majority of the time we do not do so lightly (including the first person to say something and if they didn't i was considering it myself). you are obviously welcome here as well as your coins and great images!
rest assured that if it is determined (if it can be from the images provided) that your coin is not authentic, we don't leave our people out to dry around here. most of us have vast experiences dealing with potential and actual counterfeits and about what to do if it is determined to be so and the types of recourse and how to proceed.
i remember one of the first coins i posted and a few members stated quite factually that my coin appeared cleaned and was not of the condition/value i thought it was and any apparent hairlines were NOT visible but i revisited that coin further down the road and i do believe they were correct the had been altered in some form or fashion. just the nature of the beast in numismatics unfortunately.
hope to hear from you sooner rather than later.
@LanceNewmanOCC
No offense taken. I appreciate the examination by others with more knowledge than myself. The jewelry shop scanned it with their XRF analyzer and the girl behind the counter said the gold content was correct, but I didn't see the reading myself. I took three of my $5 liberties with me (all purchased from different sellers) and she said they all had the correct gold content. At this point, I'm not sure what the best course of action is. I may try to find another local shop with an analyzer to see if the results are the same. I know the metal content doesn't necessarily mean it's not counterfeit. I may send it to our host to see what their opinion is. It has raised my level of concern for purchasing pre-1933 gold. I was aware of counterfeits, but thought most had obvious signs. I've been putting off purchasing the precious metals verifier, but I might have to reconsider.
that is nice to hear @ksuscott
i went through some ha.com archives to address the rim issue and i haven't found a single exception yet where a certified example has such thin rims. fwiw
it still amazes me that counterfeit gold coins can have correct gold content where numismatic premium doesn't really exist. it seems as though it would not be profitable; unless the coin was unc at one point where some premium may be and somewhere along the way it got circulated.
i do know there are situations where people cause chaos simply for the sake of it but that doesn't seem like it would be at play here.
i personally wouldn't recommend getting it certified simply to save your money as the odds are against this coin. i'm personally not comfortable enough to say 100% one way or the other and if it scans as the business says, exchange/return will prob. be difficult. sending it off puts it pretty much to rest but locks in a loss.
perhaps others have the sweet solution
Good images of an interesting coin...
Do you have a scale and did you weigh the coin?
Currently, I do not believe there is enough information present to offer a definitive opinion. I believe the 1882 $5 is a very common date to the tune of 2.5M struck. I am not familiar with all the die marriages that exist. The coin has rims and dentils that are suspect. The reverse in the area of UNITED has unusual characteristics that create doubt in my mind... But on the other hand would some of the die polish exist as it does on what would potentially be a cast counterfeit? I tend to doubt that. Perhaps a greater search for the date through auction archives may help with the rims and the characteristics of your coin.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
...there is no such thing as PL gold
@ksuscott
after looking at the price of gold as of this post $1810, this site shows your coin will melt out at $438 or so, probably a little less will be paid by someone. good thing about having a possible counterfeit with acceptable gold content.
not sure of your desire or intention but there may be an out as you should be able to easily replace this coin even with the shortage of bullion coins. "shortage" i've heard this being in shops while looking at coins as well to some extent.
i guess i can argue against my point it isn't illegal to posses this coin as a counterfeit. if it has the accurate gold content, then you could sell it at any time to a smelter or someone who sells to a smelter (depending on bullion pricing) and probably be ok.
one way for you to somewhat check if it really does scan ok, (not sure the honesty or knowledge of the people you worked with) is to go ahead and get a weight. if it isn't gold or has a lower content, the odds of it being out of acceptable range is pretty high and if it doesn't pretty much puts the final nail in this coffin.
some people would enjoy sending it off to get the bodybag holder to take back to the people that sold it. i've seen all these scenarios and more on this forum and some shops. how you handle it will be equally as important as what you do but whatever it is try to have a good time and learn a lot!
My understanding was that it was done when private ownership of gold bullion was not allowed. So various parties counterfeited coins with the correct weight so it could pass through legally. The intent wasn’t numismatic fraud but smuggling, effectively. After gold ownership became legal again the numismatic angle came into light.
TurtleCat Gold Dollars