Home U.S. Coin Forum

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

burfle23burfle23 Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭✭✭

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

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

«1

Comments

  • burfle23burfle23 Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭✭✭

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

  • lermishlermish Posts: 1,766 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @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.

  • burfle23burfle23 Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭✭✭

    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:

  • davewesendavewesen Posts: 5,676 ✭✭✭✭✭

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

  • OriginalDanOriginalDan Posts: 3,707 ✭✭✭✭✭

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

  • lermishlermish Posts: 1,766 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @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

  • ChrisH821ChrisH821 Posts: 6,282 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @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.

    Collector, occasional seller

  • gonzergonzer Posts: 2,985 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Her thumb on the branch looks like a big toe.

  • burfle23burfle23 Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @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!

  • burfle23burfle23 Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 30, 2023 2:08PM

    @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?

  • lilolmelilolme Posts: 2,388 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @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/

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=2YNufnS_kf4 - Mama I'm coming home ...................................................................................................................................................................... RLJ 1958 - 2023

  • slider23slider23 Posts: 634 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November 30, 2023 2:28PM

    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:

  • burfle23burfle23 Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 30, 2023 2:28PM

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

  • lermishlermish Posts: 1,766 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @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.

  • burfle23burfle23 Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭✭✭

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

  • lermishlermish Posts: 1,766 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 30, 2023 2:41PM

    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.

  • burfle23burfle23 Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @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".

  • jacrispiesjacrispies Posts: 670 ✭✭✭✭✭

    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.

    "For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord" Romans 6:23. Young fellow suffering from Bust Half fever.

  • lermishlermish Posts: 1,766 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @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

  • slider23slider23 Posts: 634 ✭✭✭✭

    @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.

  • burfle23burfle23 Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭✭✭

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

    @slider23 thanks for that feature!

  • kazkaz Posts: 9,040 ✭✭✭✭✭

    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?

  • lilolmelilolme Posts: 2,388 ✭✭✭✭✭

    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. :)

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=2YNufnS_kf4 - Mama I'm coming home ...................................................................................................................................................................... RLJ 1958 - 2023

  • AUandAGAUandAG Posts: 24,486 ✭✭✭✭✭

    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!

    Registry: CC lowballs (boblindstrom), [email protected]
  • burfle23burfle23 Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭✭✭

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

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

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

  • alefzeroalefzero Posts: 854 ✭✭✭✭✭

    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).

  • telephoto1telephoto1 Posts: 4,704 ✭✭✭✭✭

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


    RIP Mom- 1932-2012
  • burfle23burfle23 Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭✭✭

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


  • CryptoCrypto Posts: 3,346 ✭✭✭✭✭

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


    Super fake

  • coinkatcoinkat Posts: 22,671 ✭✭✭✭✭

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

    Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.

  • Apollo_23Apollo_23 Posts: 124 ✭✭✭

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

  • burfle23burfle23 Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭✭✭

    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.

  • Namvet69Namvet69 Posts: 8,595 ✭✭✭✭✭

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

    BST: endeavor1967, synchr, kliao, Outhaul, Donttellthewife, U1Chicago, ajaan, mCarney1173, SurfinHi, MWallace, Sandman70gt, mustanggt, Pittstate03, Lazybones, Walkerguy21D, coinandcurrency242 , thebigeng, Collectorcoins, JimTyler, USMarine6, Elkevvo, Coll3ctor, Yorkshireman, CUKevin, ranshdow, CoinHunter4, bennybravo, Centsearcher, braddick, Windycity, ZoidMeister, mirabela, JJM, RichURich, Bullsitter, jmski52

  • slider23slider23 Posts: 634 ✭✭✭✭

    @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.

  • slider23slider23 Posts: 634 ✭✭✭✭

    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

  • burfle23burfle23 Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 18, 2024 7:17AM

    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:

  • burfle23burfle23 Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭✭✭

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

  • DelawareDoonsDelawareDoons Posts: 3,167 ✭✭✭✭✭

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

    Professional Numismatist. "It's like God, Family, Country, except Sticker, Plastic, Coin."

  • AUandAGAUandAG Posts: 24,486 ✭✭✭✭✭

    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!

    Registry: CC lowballs (boblindstrom), [email protected]
  • Apollo_23Apollo_23 Posts: 124 ✭✭✭

    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

  • CryptoCrypto Posts: 3,346 ✭✭✭✭✭

    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_23Apollo_23 Posts: 124 ✭✭✭

    @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.

  • mbogomanmbogoman Posts: 5,103 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @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_23Apollo_23 Posts: 124 ✭✭✭

    Thank you all!!!

  • lermishlermish Posts: 1,766 ✭✭✭✭✭

    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.


  • burfle23burfle23 Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭✭✭

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

  • burfle23burfle23 Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭✭✭

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

  • lermishlermish Posts: 1,766 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @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 :D

  • Cougar1978Cougar1978 Posts: 7,451 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 24, 2024 12:45PM

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

    So Cali Area - Coins & Currency

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file