1893 Isabella Quarter electrotype or struck counterfeit?

coinsarefun

I'm re, re-visiting this piece and trying to make a definitive answer as to if this is a:
struck copy?
Cast?
Electrotype?

First post
.
.
Second Post
.
.
I can see a faint line on a fair amount of the edge. But, looking closely at obv & rev does not appear to be filled.....
....or if so there is no metal showing other than copper. Weight is 3.7gram.
.
.
What is your opinion now regarding this one?
.
.
.

.
.

.
.
.
.

JeffMTampa

With a mintage of 24K there couldn't have been many Reverse Dies. I haven't seen the die crack thru "Columbian Quar" on the reverse previously, but perhaps there are genuine examples?

LanceNewmanOCC

i don't have much to offer just now but to say i sure like that piece.

i've only owned perhaps 1-2 examples of this wonderful classic comem but not due to lack of desire. just so darn many of this low mintage coin have been harshly cleaned, damaged, polished etc. it is kind of uncanny. just from the date and mintage i would strongly presume there'd be thousands at 63 and above. w/o checking the pops, i HIGHLY doubt that is the case.

if those are your images, very nice.

BUT, no edge image. bah.

coinsarefun

@JeffMTampa said:
With a mintage of 24K there couldn't have been many Reverse Dies. I haven't seen the die crack thru "Columbian Quar" on the reverse previously, but perhaps there are genuine examples?

.
.
I am under the impression it is not a die crack....here are some closeups of that and more
.
.

.
.

.
.

coinsarefun

@LanceNewmanOCC said:
i don't have much to offer just now but to say i sure like that piece.

i've only owned perhaps 1-2 examples of this wonderful classic comem but not due to lack of desire. just so darn many of this low mintage coin have been harshly cleaned, damaged, polished etc. it is kind of uncanny. just from the date and mintage i would strongly presume there'd be thousands at 63 and above. w/o checking the pops, i HIGHLY doubt that is the case.

if those are your images, very nice.

BUT, no edge image. bah.

.
.
The last 2 are of the edge but somewhat dark. I also posted some closeups
.
.

rec78

My 2000 redbook shows the weight of a Barber Quarter to be 6.25 grams. I would assume that a Isabella quarter would weigh the same. If you have a copper coin I do not know the size to weight ratio of silver to copper. I don't know if it could be authenticated. I don't know if it is an electrotype. Sometimes you can tell electrotypes by closely looking at the edges for seems. It does not appear to be cast either.
If I were you, I would study real Isabella quarters to see if I could find one with a similar die break that is on the reverse near the bottom. I could be wrong, but I think that there was only 1 die used per side for the Isabella quarter. You could spend the money now to try to authenticate it at PCGS, or ask this question again in another 13 years.
Real or fake, it is unusual for only one to show up.
If you see a faint line along the edges it could very well be an electrotype.

jonathanb

No question in my mind that it’s a die crack.

The details look softer than I would expect from an electrotype so I would lean towards one of the other options. Does it pass a ring test?

coinsarefun

@jonathanb said:
No question in my mind that it’s a die crack.

The details look softer than I would expect from an electrotype so I would lean towards one of the other options. Does it pass a ring test?

.
.
It does not make a thud noise, rather a ring. But at 3.7grams....what could it be then?.
.
If I remember correctly....all those years back Dick(Great Toning) said he showed it around to several people at one
of the shows and no one could figure out what it was.

rec78

@JeffMTampa said:
With a mintage of 24K there couldn't have been many Reverse Dies. I haven't seen the die crack thru "Columbian Quar" on the reverse previously, but perhaps there are genuine examples?

The actual mintage was 40,023. 24,214 is the amount distributed to the public. 15,809 were melted.

LanceNewmanOCC

@coinsarefun said:
The last 2 are of the edge but somewhat dark. I also posted some closeups

.

@LanceNewmanOCC
BUT, no edge image. bah.

.
edge, not rim my dear. BUT, i was just poking ya anyway becoz you've been posting such lovely images AND edge images recently.

like someone else said, it is a BIG die crack and really is right at the retained cud stage since that crack connects back to the RIM through the N. will be interesting when we get the images that match from the authentic die-stage counterpart. if no one else posts them by the time i get around to it, i'll post em. i am presuming it is a transfer coin and that the counterfeiters dies didn't crack up.

MFeld

In case no one posted it yet, the coin is 1893, not 1833😉

coinsarefun

@MFeld said:
In case no one posted it yet, the coin is 1893, not 1833😉

.
.
Well, I thought if I deducted my age it might be worth more

MFeld

@coinsarefun said:

@MFeld said:
In case no one posted it yet, the coin is 1893, not 1833😉

.
.
Well, I thought if I deducted my age it might be worth more

Interesting strategy!😄

CaptHenway

An electrotype is definitely a possibility. We do need to see the edge.