Here's one for the Trade$ experts- what do you see...

burfle23

Reportedly returned body-bagged and listed recently; listing was removed.

Do you agree counterfeit? Looking for a match for the mint mark.

Crypto

I see a fake die struck trade, better than most but clearly not good, look at the definition of the hey bail, letters eagle. Not struck with mint quality tonnage

Mint mark placement isn’t a 100% tell as many fakes are made with transfer dies

burfle23

Understood, but the mint mark placement should be correct for the date, shouldn't it?

lermish

@burfle23 said:
Understood, but the mint mark placement should be correct for the date, shouldn't it?

I am far from an expert, so please take this with a grain of salt. But the 75-CC had many reverse dies and the MM could certainly wander.

burfle23

Thank you @lermish , I am not as well. There may be more reverses shown than reported for the type 1 reverse than indicated in Coin Facts:

davewesen

are there any reeds on the edge or is it supposed to be broadstruck?

OriginalDan

It's fake, like @crypto said it's not the worst we've seen but it's pretty bad.

lermish

@burfle23 said:
Thank you @lermish , I am not as well. There may be more reverses shown than reported for the type 1 reverse than indicated in Coin Facts:

There are two designs but many dies (15ish I think?). The dies had a variety of different mint mark designs and locations.

etc

ChrisH821

@burfle23 said:
Understood, but the mint mark placement should be correct for the date, shouldn't it?

No. Counterfeiters often mix obverse and reverse transfer dies of different dates. Think fake 1916 SLQ with a type 2 reverse.

gonzer

Her thumb on the branch looks like a big toe.

burfle23

@ChrisH821 said:

@burfle23 said:
Understood, but the mint mark placement should be correct for the date, shouldn't it?

No. Counterfeiters often mix obverse and reverse transfer dies of different dates. Think fake 1916 SLQ with a type 2 reverse.

Sorry, I am not being clear; I have counterfeits with mixed reverse and obverse designs and have written a few articles on them...

What I am noting, for the posted example to be genuine the reverse should be correct!

burfle23

@lermish said:

@burfle23 said:
Thank you @lermish , I am not as well. There may be more reverses shown than reported for the type 1 reverse than indicated in Coin Facts:

There are two designs but many dies (15ish I think?). The dies had a variety of different mint mark designs and locations.

etc

Thanks; are all you posted for the type 1 reverse like the posted one? And while you are at it, did you find one that matches the posted coin?

lilolme

@burfle23 said:

Thanks; are all you posted for the type 1 reverse like the posted one? And while you are at it, did you find one that matches >the posted coin?

>
.
This might help but I am not a Trade dollar type. In the last resources update I sent to AspieRocco I included a Trade Dollar link by a forum member (sorry forgot who). It is similar to the Morgan / Peace VAM. It is under the $1 Silver and non-gold in the Resources thread. Here is the link. Select / click the applicable date mm.

http://registry.ssdcvams.com/Trade/

slider23

This fake 75CC appears to be made from the following die pair:
Per John Coxe #16 - obverse Type 1 53, Reverse type 1 47 - Obverse Wide date set slightly left. The 1 is slightly tilted left and the 5 is slightly tilted right. Rev – Large wide CC set left. Early state of the die where the more normal position CC was polished out and it was re-punched to the left. Genuine date position and CC position below:

burfle23

Awesome resource @lilolme ! Thanks- will use going forward!

lermish

@lilolme said:

@burfle23 said:

Thanks; are all you posted for the type 1 reverse like the posted one? And while you are at it, did you find one that matches >the posted coin?

>
.
This might help but I am not a Trade dollar type. In the last resources update I sent to AspieRocco I included a Trade Dollar link by a forum member (sorry forgot who). It is similar to the Morgan / Peace VAM. It is under the $1 Silver and non-gold in the Resources thread. Here is the link. Select / click the applicable date mm.

http://registry.ssdcvams.com/Trade/

That is the guide produced by @alefzero and is very helpful.

For the MMs above, one was a type 2, the others type 1...I just grabbed the first several I saw on coinfacts but there are more. I'm basically at the limit of my knowledge though. However, @alefzero has all of the dies catalogued and can answer your question in better detail.

burfle23

Thank you @slider23 but they don't appear to match to my eyes.

lermish

To answer your question though, while that coin posted is an obvious fake that mint mark does appear to match a known position and design.

burfle23

@lermish said:
To answer your question though, while that coin posted is an obvious fake that mint mark does appear to match a known position and design.

Thanks, I guess I just can't find it then...

I see obvious fakes everyday, some better than others; I always try to attribute a fake by the dies used when possible in my articles- never try to just tell someone who doesn't know it's bad without some image comparisons when possible.

I also look for common reverses for counterfeits, especially the "CC's".

jacrispies

Obverse is not too bad. Full rims with nearly complete detail may fool me at a quick glance. The reverse is terrible. Shallow, weakly struck, and weak dentils that would set red flags left and right.

lermish

@burfle23 said:
Thank you @slider23 but they don't appear to match to my eyes.

Tough to tell the angle and exact spacing from the pics but but here are some likely candidates:

https://www.pcgs.com/cert/80679026
https://www.pcgs.com/cert/35644991
https://www.pcgs.com/cert/33433538

Closest I could find is with a type 2 rev:

https://www.pcgs.com/cert/13038981

slider23

@burfle23 said:
I see obvious fakes everyday, some better than others; I always try to attribute a fake by the dies used when possible in my articles- never try to just tell someone who doesn't know it's bad without some image comparisons when possible.

I also look for common reverses for counterfeits, especially the "CC's".

The reverse on this fake has a stand alone neck feather that I have seen on other fakes. I have never seen the stand alone neck feather on any genuine examples. Maybe this can help you attribute the fake.

burfle23

Trying to take the "angularity" out- still no matches for position AND spacing. Cool discussion though!

@slider23 thanks for that feature!

kaz

The overall look is just mushy and badly impressed as others pointed out. the free floating neck feather is interesting and may represent an attempt to improve the transfer die, who knows?

lilolme

Again I am not a Trade dollar type but the neck feathers seem to have that look on some examples but better struck. Of the 4 that lermish listed above, 3 of them have it. Below is the 2nd one (35644991) listed. They also show up in the variety link list.
That notched 'R' in TRADE is kind of a nice twist.

AUandAG

Dentils are my first go to with fakes. This one has the typical very weak dentils, especially on the reverse. Clearly not US Mint made.
bob
vegas, baby!

burfle23

Another day, another post about a bad trade $ ...

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1098112/cc-trade-dollar-good-or-bad#latest

This posted 1878-CC has the same reverse as this one:

alefzero

I have not read the thread here entirely yet, but there are many different sorts of fakes of US coins, particularly Trade dollars. Among them are those produced using dies prepared from real Trade dollars. A very notable example is the famous 1876-CC DDR. I even purchased one at a significant cost during the course of my original study. Be VERY careful buying one of those raw. If you do buy one or have one, weigh it and, if possible, sigma test it. Actually, a responsible thing to do with an raw Trade dollars. CC ones, more generally, are the top counterfeited. A guide to die varieties, hopefully, will help as a first line defense (though there is no way all varieties have been yet observed and catalogued).

telephoto1

Die mark at the F on OF is a tell also. We've seen this on other asian fake TDs

burfle23

And now a currently listed 1874-CC with the same "notched R" reverse...

Crypto

@burfle23 said:
And now a currently listed 1874-CC with the same "notched R" reverse...

Super fake

coinkat

Without the benefit of an in hand review, the decision is appropriate

Apollo_23

What is up with this one? Found metal detecting? Environmental damage?

burfle23

Here's an image of the three different dates with the same reverse I have documented; the listing for the 1874 I posted was removed.

Namvet69

I'm enjoying this study. @burfle23 Thanks for kicking it off. Peace Roy

slider23

@Apollo_23 said:
What is up with this one? Found metal detecting? Environmental damage?

It is a counterfeit. The denticles are off. No known date and mint mark position match the example. The slant of the top of the second T is off in TRUST. The 4 in the date has no bottom serif. The example most likely has many more issues.

slider23

You can add this to your Trade Dollar counterfeit reverse that ends up on different dates:
This one is from a 1874 CC

This one is from a 1875 CC

burfle23

I saw the 1874-CC last night and agree @slider23 ; added it to my fie of images- thanks for the post.

I had compared it to my fake in a bad PCGS slab:

burfle23

@slider23 I found an 1876 dated one in a recent listing as well:

DelawareDoons

Look at the reverse rim in OP's photos. No bueno.

AUandAG

Missing, incomplete, distorted dentils are the give away for me. Easy to pick up on and they are protected by the rim in 99% of the cases.
bob
vegas, baby!

Apollo_23

Help TD experts out there with this 1874cc trade. It has chops, looks like a dig on the rim. Guess my question is, has it been cleaned and or dipped and what would this grade as

Crypto

That one might be real but heavily polished. Pics aren’t good enough to know for sure but good enough to know to stay away. In hand it might check out if under 150$ for a raw hands on example if one wanted such a coin.

Apollo_23

@Crypto said:
That one might be real but heavily polished. Pics aren’t good enough to know for sure but good enough to know to stay away. In hand it might check out if under 150$ for a raw hands on example if one wanted such a coin.

Yeah no the guy wanted 10x that!! That is why I asked. Something seemed off.

mbogoman

@Crypto said:
That one might be real but heavily polished. Pics aren’t good enough to know for sure but good enough to know to stay away. In hand it might check out if under 150$ for a raw hands on example if one wanted such a coin.

Also, that "X" behind Liberty's head is not a chopmark, it's been gouged into the field with a knife or other sharp object. So, the coin is polished and damaged = 2 big knocks against it...

Apollo_23

Thank you all!!!

lermish

Here's another one for you @burfle23 that I came across today. Other than the reverse die mismatch and the obverse dentils, I think the details are pretty decent on this. It looked a little off in hand but I probably would have just glossed over it and moved on if not for the die & dentils.

burfle23

Thanks for posting @lermish ! Do you own this one?

burfle23

Found this one yesterday; the hits just keep on coming...

lermish

@burfle23 said:
Thanks for posting @lermish ! Do you own this one?

No, I encountered it at a show. I let the dealer know he should remove it and that was that.

I might have bought it for $40-50 just for a conversation piece but I doubt he would have taken kindly to me saying it's a fake, so instead of $800 here's $40, since he didn't know it was fake

Cougar1978

Looks too good to be true. Only a dunce would buy it in its raw state.