1873-CC Trade Dollar (Update Inside!)

DelawareDoons

This one gets two neato-burritos.

Update here!

Full res links;
Obverse
Reverse

may

Love the look.

lermish

Very nice, tough year!

SPalladino

Nice! Looks like:

7 – I19/I9 : Slanted 1 / CC Low Tilted Right

Obv - Wide centered date with the 1 slanted left. Rev – Medium CC mint mark, wide (just over a C width separates), set low, both titled left but the right C (under the comma) more so. Rev – Medium CC mint mark set low and tilted right. The C on the right is under the comma and tilted further. Struck with a 5° relative die rotation.

http://registry.ssdcvams.com/Trade/1873-CC_Trade.html

gumby1234

Nice looking coin for the grade.

TennesseeDave

I like it. That's one date and mintmark combo I don't have. I sold one here several years ago and never replaced it.

DelawareDoons

@TennesseeDave said:
I like it. That's one date and mintmark combo I don't have. I sold one here several years ago and never replaced it.

Tough date, yeah. Sorry you haven't replaced yours yet!

TennesseeDave

@DelawareDoons said:
Tough date, yeah. Sorry you haven't replaced yours yet!

I just haven't found the right one at the right price. Prices have skyrocketed in the last few years.

Goldbully

I like the original look of your 1873-CC.

Is she graded?

vulcanize

@DelawareDoons said:
This one gets two neato-burritos.

Beautiful looking coin. Thanks for sharing.

@TennesseeDave said:
I like it. That's one date and mintmark combo I don't have. I sold one here several years ago and never replaced it.

My first one in the raw for the Dansco came with a hole that was given F 12 details designation by ANACS, Got stuck after subsequent upgrade to VF 25 due to the steep price curve and also because the focus had shifted to landing the proofs by then.

DelawareDoons

@Goldbully said:
I like the original look of your 1873-CC.

Is she graded?

Raw, actually.

braddick

Nice!
I love the hard, dove gray surfaces.

DoubleEagle59

Here's my problem coin 73-CC.

ricko

My 1874CC Trade dollar.... Cheers, RickO

Goldbully

I have three CC Trade $1's.....1875, 1877, and here's my 1873..................

AU55 with wide CC Mint mark

mbogoman

This date/mm has several varieties for the aficionado:

MPD FS-301 VF20 (also the 1.2mm "Wide CC"):

MPD FS-302 VF25:

XF45 CAC:

DelawareDoons

Thanks to all for chiming in and/or sharing their own examples of this tough date!

I think enough people have participated for me to now reveal that the example I posted in my first post is a transfer die counterfeit. I was curious to see if anybody would catch it, that's why I directly linked the super high resolution shots.

There are some cropped images below with a brief discussion on what I'm seeing. Though the coin has far more issues than I could highlight, there's repeaters (damage to the host coin that was replicated on the transfer dies) everywhere. As far as transfer die counterfeits go, it's decently well done, but still relatively crude compared to the stuff that comes through the grading rooms these days.

Die scratches coming out of the denticles. Common from tooling the transfer dies prior to production.

While the Sea Foam is a nice touch, it's not part of the original design, and is a remnant of the transfer die process.

Repeaters, or indentations of damage from the original coin that were transferred to the counterfeit dies.

Weird bumps coming out of the denticles, as well as some wormy raised bumps in the fields

Another wormy mark, as well as one of many struck through wire/thread fragments on this example

Raised dots, or pimples, all over the coin. More numerous on the reverse than obverse.

Tooling marks in the denticles. While these do exist on business strikes, they're almost never this prominent nor this concentrated

Relatively large repeater indication, as well as another struck through

Very peculiar area with the rim/denticle deformation. I theorize the host coin had a nasty rim bump here that was repaired on the transfer dies.

Yet another wormy raised mark and more repeaters

This is a fantastic teaching piece due to the preponderance of transfer die issues present, and I'll be keeping it for that purpose.

mbogoman

Wow! I didn't even look at the high res pics. Very interesting for sure!

gumby1234

I didn't know there were hi resolution pics. I thought the coin looked a bit too clean for the grade.

lermish

@mbogoman said:
Wow! I didn't even look at the high res pics. Very interesting for sure!

+1, but I'm not sure I would have caught it regardless, well done counterfeit.

braddick

Well, this is slightly embarrassing. . .

Shurke

Maybe it’s just a photo-vs-in-hand thing, but how do you tell a repeater from a legit contact mark?

I’m looking at these photos and thinking—absent the other die transfer indicators—none of repeaters would have raised red flags for me.

Walkerguy21D

Extremely deceptive, thank you for posting this.

DelawareDoons

@Shurke said:
Maybe it’s just a photo-vs-in-hand thing, but how do you tell a repeater from a legit contact mark?

I’m looking at these photos and thinking—absent the other die transfer indicators—none of repeaters would have raised red flags for me.

Repeaters lack metal movement. Actual hits will have moved metal.

may

@DelawareDoons said:
Thanks to all for chiming in and/or sharing their own examples of this tough date!

I thought something was off, but I trusted you. (Big mistake!) Very good counterfeit, fooled me.

DelawareDoons

@Ownerofawheatiehorde said:

@DelawareDoons said:
Thanks to all for chiming in and/or sharing their own examples of this tough date!

I thought something was off, but I trusted you. (Big mistake!) Very good counterfeit, fooled me.

TennesseeDave

It never crossed my mind that it was not a genuine piece. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

Shurke

@DelawareDoons said:
Repeaters lack metal movement. Actual hits will have moved metal.

Thanks. Appreciate the tip.

jesbroken

Never considered it a counterfeit, but thought the face looked mishapen then saw the hires photos and saw it was just beatup. I felt the color somewhat different than most. Thanks for the info.
Jim

Project Numismatics

I am signed up to take the ANA Counterfeit Detection class later this year at the SCNA show. This is exactly why! Appreciate these educational posts.

kaz

Nice analysis and excellent photos. do you have any of the edge reeding? I often find that is off on fakes.

Meltdown

Damn! That would fool a lot of folks! Thanks for the share.

fathom

Good fake.

surfer3903

1873 CC MPD VP-001 T$1 MS. NGC Attribution: VP-001 ..............
Diagnostics: The tops of errant numerals 87 are seen within the denticles below the date. This obverse is found paired with a reverse on which a die gouge runs through the D of DOLLAR.

pmh1nic

@surfer3903 said:
1873 CC MPD VP-001 T$1 MS. NGC Attribution: VP-001 ..............
Diagnostics: The tops of errant numerals 87 are seen within the denticles below the date. This obverse is found paired with a reverse on which a die gouge runs through the D of DOLLAR.

Given the price of a genuine coin even in lower grades you need to avail yourself of this type of information, a lot of it readily available online or purchase from a reputable and knowledgeable dealer before buying one raw.

lermish

@surfer3903 said:
1873 CC MPD VP-001 T$1 MS. NGC Attribution: VP-001 ..............
Diagnostics: The tops of errant numerals 87 are seen within the denticles below the date. This obverse is found paired with a reverse on which a die gouge runs through the D of DOLLAR.

Great coin! And fantastic quality pictures also, makes it it easy to see the diagnostics. Welcome to the board!