I don’t think they’re modified genuine coins. All of the smaller diameter pieces show strong outward metal flow at the wording on the perimeter. Look at the letters on the reverse of this one. It’s classic metal flow, something that would not be present on a normally struck coin.
Even this odd one shows the metal flow. Look at the E in LIBERTY.
Because of there being multiple dates I believe they are decent die struck fakes (with some obvious issues). And the one happens to be a mis-struck fake.
If they had been all one date, I might have thought that they were struck on foreign planchets or poorly upset planchets.
Off weight, off diameter and the reeding height, depth and space count look off.
All would lead me to believe they are not genuine.
I don't think they are magic coins.
@USSID17 said:
Counterfeit or fake?? Why? If you had this skill level, why would you pick this clad junk to be counterfeit?
If you can make them for 20 cents and spend them for $1, that's a 400% profit.
The problem with the counterfeit theory is with as much detail that is given to the dies/coins, the easiest part of the equation is the size. Getting that wrong makes no sense. It is just as easy- if not even easier- to die counterfeit these on the proper size planchets as it is not.
Have you tried to see if they stick to a magnet? I ask because of a dime I once saw that looked odd and it stuck to magnet. (See 1977 dime story thread).
@USSID17 said:
Counterfeit or fake?? Why? If you had this skill level, why would you pick this clad junk to be counterfeit?
If you can make them for 20 cents and spend them for $1, that's a 400% profit.
The problem with the counterfeit theory is with as much detail that is given to the dies/coins, the easiest part of the equation is the size. Getting that wrong makes no sense. It is just as easy- if not even easier- to die counterfeit these on the proper size planchets as it is not.
I've already said they aren't counterfeit. I was only answering the question a to why anyone would counterfeit them.
Appearance, measurements, Logic and Occam's razor all clearly and strongly suggest, to me, genuine coins cut down and new reeding applied, most likely as sleight of hand illusion "making money" magic trick props. While admitting it's possible, I'd be very surprised at proof of any other explanation
The trick is performed by placing several of the small coins in a pocket or sleeve, with a hollowed out shell over one. First, on the table, one is placed, covered, the shell moved aside secretly under the cloth, abracadabra, uncovered, there are two!
Then covered again, the hollow one is moved to the pocket during banter and distraction, another one placed within, then moved back under the cloth. Cloth is removed, showing two, covered, banter distract while second small coin is uncovered, shell to side, uncovered, voila! 3 dollars!
@Baley said:
Appearance, measurements, Logic and Occam's razor all clearly and strongly suggest, to me, genuine coins cut down and new reeding applied, most likely as sleight of hand illusion "making money" magic trick props. While admitting it's possible, I'd be very surprised at proof of any other explanation
It's not "metal flow" from dies, its tapered letters where the edges were machined and beveled so they're not sharp.
And yes, my hobby before coin collecting was magic. Saw these sets for sale and the trick demonstrated at the magic shop, but I couldn't afford it at age 7
@USSID17 said:
Counterfeit or fake?? Why? If you had this skill level, why would you pick this clad junk to be counterfeit?
If you can make them for 20 cents and spend them for $1, that's a 400% profit.
The problem with the counterfeit theory is with as much detail that is given to the dies/coins, the easiest part of the equation is the size. Getting that wrong makes no sense. It is just as easy- if not even easier- to die counterfeit these on the proper size planchets as it is not.
I've already said they aren't counterfeit. I was only answering the question a to why anyone would counterfeit them.
Heck, henning counterfeited nickels.
Ok, okay. . . let's all settle down. Perhaps I misread you.
@Baley said:
The trick is performed by placing several of the small coins in a pocket or sleeve, with a hollowed out shell over one. First, on the table, one is placed, covered, the shell moved aside secretly under the cloth, abracadabra, uncovered, there are two!
Then covered again, the hollow one is moved to the pocket during banter and distraction, another one placed within, then moved back under the cloth. Cloth is removed, showing two, covered, banter distract while second small coin is uncovered, shell to side, uncovered, voila! 3 dollars!
That is a fair possibility. The coins did start out as genuine coins.
Another possibility is that they were trimmed down to fit into some sort of jewelry setting, such as a belt buckle, that was made a bit too small, and rather than scrap the jewelry settings they cut some coins down to fit inside them.
Edited to add: Back in the early 1970's, the UN's Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) organized a program wherein literally dozens of countries produced a special FAO coin (usually a low denomination that was cheap enough that the country in question could just donate 10,000 or whatever of them to the FAO) with the coins assembled into sets that were sold as a fundraiser for the FAO. A numismatic company in Montreal was hired to administer program. Once all of the participants were lined up, it got the specifics of each coin and ordered some sort of die-cut album to hold the coins. It would sell the sets and send the proceeds, less their commission, to the FAO.
Bags of coins arrived from around the world. People were hired to assemble the sets, and an aluminum coin from Algeria would not fit in its hole. Algeria had told the FAO that the coin would be 18.5 mm, but they were 19.5 mm. All of the albums were already die cut, using an expensive custom-made die, so the numismatic company took the coins to a local machine shop and had each coin trimmed by one mm. I think they were forced through an 18.5 mm hole that sheared off the edge.
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.
Un-Expanded Shell Sets use an unexpanded shell along with inner coins which are shaved & re-edged to match their originally minted edging. Since the shell is un-expanded, it suffers absolutely no distortion, and since the inner edge of the shell and the outer edge of the inserts are both hand-milled by me, the perfectly-round match is more exact than in an expanded set. Also, re-milled edges make for a better palm-grip.
@USSID17 said:
Counterfeit or fake?? Why? If you had this skill level, why would you pick this clad junk to be counterfeit?
If you can make them for 20 cents and spend them for $1, that's a 400% profit.
The problem with the counterfeit theory is with as much detail that is given to the dies/coins, the easiest part of the equation is the size. Getting that wrong makes no sense. It is just as easy- if not even easier- to die counterfeit these on the proper size planchets as it is not.
I've already said they aren't counterfeit. I was only answering the question a to why anyone would counterfeit them.
Heck, henning counterfeited nickels.
Ok, okay. . . let's all settle down. Perhaps I misread you.
These are these ones, not the one I posted earlier. The same guy that makes the expanded shell one I showed above grinds these ones down to make them smaller and then re-mills the edges to put the reeding back on. Then he makes a shell out of a regular one.
@ifthevamzarockin said:
Looks like a fair chance they may be magic coins.
Un-Expanded Shell Sets use an unexpanded shell along with inner coins which are shaved & re-edged to match their originally minted edging. Since the shell is un-expanded, it suffers absolutely no distortion, and since the inner edge of the shell and the outer edge of the inserts are both hand-milled by me, the perfectly-round match is more exact than in an expanded set. Also, re-milled edges make for a better palm-grip.
Also, some look like they had the normally raised rim filed down. Not the reeded edge, but the raised edge along teh outer perimeter, only at the top and bottom edge of the coin.
The 1978 looks like a partial collar or slightly 1-2% off cent strike.
Seems strange that only 1 has a mint mark. The forehead on each appears to have no wrinkles (maybe from the camera angle). The hair line above the ear seems to go in and I thought it looks more pronounced than it should be. The Ike I'm looking has the hair at is less angled to the right and seems to be more of a straight hairline. They look a little questionable to me. Just my opinion after looking at one of mine.
USN & USAF retired 1971-1993
Successful Transactions with more than 100 Members
Comments
I can't wait for an answer to this conundrum.
I am leaning also towards "Magic Coins".
Wayne
Kennedys are my quest...
This one looks like a Magicians Coin from here.
That was my interpretation as well.
If they were modified (reduced in size) then fresh reeding was added.
I don’t think they’re modified genuine coins. All of the smaller diameter pieces show strong outward metal flow at the wording on the perimeter. Look at the letters on the reverse of this one. It’s classic metal flow, something that would not be present on a normally struck coin.
Even this odd one shows the metal flow. Look at the E in LIBERTY.
Because of there being multiple dates I believe they are decent die struck fakes (with some obvious issues). And the one happens to be a mis-struck fake.
If they had been all one date, I might have thought that they were struck on foreign planchets or poorly upset planchets.
are they small diameter? they look like it
Update:
So I took out a group of Ikes i had lying around and took the shiniest examples of copper on the side. These all had the correct diameter.
Next i weighed first a genuine
and then 2 genuine
followed by a questionable 1 as well as 2 together.
Here they are next to each other
And here are some more closer photos.
I dont really think the magic angle would make sense as why use different dates and mint marks?? but what do I know.
Off weight, off diameter and the reeding height, depth and space count look off.
All would lead me to believe they are not genuine.
I don't think they are magic coins.
If you can make them for 20 cents and spend them for $1, that's a 400% profit.
The problem with the counterfeit theory is with as much detail that is given to the dies/coins, the easiest part of the equation is the size. Getting that wrong makes no sense. It is just as easy- if not even easier- to die counterfeit these on the proper size planchets as it is not.
peacockcoins
Have you tried to see if they stick to a magnet? I ask because of a dime I once saw that looked odd and it stuck to magnet. (See 1977 dime story thread).
I've already said they aren't counterfeit. I was only answering the question a to why anyone would counterfeit them.
Heck, henning counterfeited nickels.
Appearance, measurements, Logic and Occam's razor all clearly and strongly suggest, to me, genuine coins cut down and new reeding applied, most likely as sleight of hand illusion "making money" magic trick props. While admitting it's possible, I'd be very surprised at proof of any other explanation
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
The trick is performed by placing several of the small coins in a pocket or sleeve, with a hollowed out shell over one. First, on the table, one is placed, covered, the shell moved aside secretly under the cloth, abracadabra, uncovered, there are two!
Then covered again, the hollow one is moved to the pocket during banter and distraction, another one placed within, then moved back under the cloth. Cloth is removed, showing two, covered, banter distract while second small coin is uncovered, shell to side, uncovered, voila! 3 dollars!
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Have to admit - I've never seen anything like them before. Very interesting reading the replies.
"When they can't find anything wrong with you, they create it!"
How do you explain the metal flow?
It's not "metal flow" from dies, its tapered letters where the edges were machined and beveled so they're not sharp.
And yes, my hobby before coin collecting was magic. Saw these sets for sale and the trick demonstrated at the magic shop, but I couldn't afford it at age 7
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Ok, okay. . . let's all settle down. Perhaps I misread you.
peacockcoins
So now I can see that the one I thought was a partial punch-out is actually one of the smaller coins simply stacked on top of a normal coin.
But I still believe these are magician's coins with the edge perimeter lathed off, the edges beveled, and new reeding applied.
Is it me, or do the coins in question look a little thinner than a real one. Can you mic the thickness of the coins?
Abracadabra
Mr_Spud
These I dont believe are the same type as they have full rims. My coins the lettering goes into the rim
That is a fair possibility. The coins did start out as genuine coins.
Another possibility is that they were trimmed down to fit into some sort of jewelry setting, such as a belt buckle, that was made a bit too small, and rather than scrap the jewelry settings they cut some coins down to fit inside them.
Edited to add: Back in the early 1970's, the UN's Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) organized a program wherein literally dozens of countries produced a special FAO coin (usually a low denomination that was cheap enough that the country in question could just donate 10,000 or whatever of them to the FAO) with the coins assembled into sets that were sold as a fundraiser for the FAO. A numismatic company in Montreal was hired to administer program. Once all of the participants were lined up, it got the specifics of each coin and ordered some sort of die-cut album to hold the coins. It would sell the sets and send the proceeds, less their commission, to the FAO.
Bags of coins arrived from around the world. People were hired to assemble the sets, and an aluminum coin from Algeria would not fit in its hole. Algeria had told the FAO that the coin would be 18.5 mm, but they were 19.5 mm. All of the albums were already die cut, using an expensive custom-made die, so the numismatic company took the coins to a local machine shop and had each coin trimmed by one mm. I think they were forced through an 18.5 mm hole that sheared off the edge.
Looks like a fair chance they may be magic coins.
https://roykueppers.com/products-list/coins/
Un-Expanded Shell Sets use an unexpanded shell along with inner coins which are shaved & re-edged to match their originally minted edging. Since the shell is un-expanded, it suffers absolutely no distortion, and since the inner edge of the shell and the outer edge of the inserts are both hand-milled by me, the perfectly-round match is more exact than in an expanded set. Also, re-milled edges make for a better palm-grip.
The coin that fits inside that shell would be shaved to be smaller. The outer shell would look normal
I wasn't upset.
So that is twice I misread you within this single thread.
I promise not to make it a third time.
peacockcoins
Lol. It's all good. Happy weekend!
@joebb21 "These I dont believe are the same type as they have full rims. My coins the lettering goes into the rim"
There is a chance the advertisement is showing the outer shell coin and the inner coin you have is not shown.
They would not be good internal coins if you can see they have been shaved
Agree it would be harder to pull off the trick on someone with knowledge of coins.
The inner coin might be used at a stage of the trick where close examination isn't offered.
These are these ones, not the one I posted earlier. The same guy that makes the expanded shell one I showed above grinds these ones down to make them smaller and then re-mills the edges to put the reeding back on. Then he makes a shell out of a regular one.
Mr_Spud
I can picture this being Fred watching us right now!
TTT. I know the consensus is leaning towards magician coins, but it would still be nice if one of the error specialists weighed in on this one.
ANA LM
USAF Retired — 34 years of active military service! 🇺🇸
Been watching and reading this thread. Now for the truth: Inflation is the answer. All our money shrinks with inflation.
Or, wasn't there a method, using electricity, to shrink coins? Don't I remember someone doing just that?
bob
any verdict here? @joebb21
I actually never had them sent off for grading. I admit after I made this thread I never did more research on them
more JFK halves were returned as damaged coins that were discovered in scrapped cars shipped to China than were ever minted in the first place.
Can you offer a source for such a statement? I find it rather incredible if true.
Also, some look like they had the normally raised rim filed down. Not the reeded edge, but the raised edge along teh outer perimeter, only at the top and bottom edge of the coin.
The 1978 looks like a partial collar or slightly 1-2% off cent strike.
Lo> @itsnotjustme said:
You'd have to Google it. I recall a govt spokesperson making that claim but I don't save every articlei read.
It does sound quite ridiculous, which is why it stood out.
It was a major basis for the rule as I recall, so it shouldn't be difficult to locate mention of that claim.
I remember the story well - here is one link:
https://www.coinworld.com/news/precious-metals/feds-investigate-counterfeit-mutilated-u-s--coins-from-china.html
"You Suck Award" - February, 2015
Discoverer of 1919 Mercury Dime DDO - FS-101
Seems strange that only 1 has a mint mark. The forehead on each appears to have no wrinkles (maybe from the camera angle). The hair line above the ear seems to go in and I thought it looks more pronounced than it should be. The Ike I'm looking has the hair at is less angled to the right and seems to be more of a straight hairline. They look a little questionable to me. Just my opinion after looking at one of mine.
USN & USAF retired 1971-1993
Successful Transactions with more than 100 Members