Improving Counterfeits- recent 1811 Half Cent…

burfle23

It has been 3 years since I wrote my Coin Week article on a family of fakes based on an 1835 type obverse and 1826 C-1 reverse.

https://coinweek.com/struck-counterfeit-coins-another-all-in-the-family-half-cent-1835-1826/

Since then it appears the counterfeiters have improved at least the 1811…

The double edged sword we talk about is the line between notifying the Hobby/ Collectors and advising the counterfeiters- a main reason I do NOT discuss physical properties of the “coins” in my articles and take some care in several of the public forums I participate in.

In my article I did show 2 major “tells” seen on every different dated example I showed, the obverse “gash” and reverse “zipper”:

An “1811” from my original article research (images from Bay listings); the green circle is a die indicator of a genuine 1826 C-1 reverse:

And now the “new” version:

The obverse is new and no longer matches the original “family” members:

Fortunately, it doesn’t exactly match either known 1811 half cent variety either, but certainly closer:

And the reverse is still the 1826 C-1, but without the “zipper”:

I consider these to be mid-level deceptive fakes, but they are closing the gap; IMHO ATTRIBUTION continues to be the key to flushing these out, or these will continue to fool some dealers and collectors alike and be sold!

The seller actually ended his auction through our conversations, and I negotiated a price to add to my research set. Part of our discussion is captured in this:

Best, Jack.

Footless

Very interesting read.

jesbroken

Thanks Jack. The first thing I noticed on the fake was the #7 star was far lower on the bust than the C1 and C2. Also on the Reverse the outermost leaf was even with the rightmost base of the F whereas the C1 and C2 were well past the base of the F. You are really on the ball with these counterfeits and hope you realize the help you are giving collectors. I feel we all here on the forum(especially early cent/half cent collectors) truly appreciate your efforts, as I know I most certainly do.
Jim

ricko

@burfle23 ... Thank you for the information and your diligent work. You provide valuable insight and data that will continue to help collectors. Cheers, RickO

DoctorPaper

The problem here, as @burfle23 points out, showing the detailed analysis of why a coin is determined to be a counterfeit provides a roadmap for the perpetrators to further refine their nefarious work. I thought it interesting that even after being provided with documentary evidence that the coin he purchased within the type set was a counterfeit, the ebayer was still arguing it might be real because that’s what a ‘seasoned dealer’ had told him last year. Seasoned with what? 😎

MetroD

@Footless said:
Very interesting read.

Welcome.