Mint sets, fraud and toning

Mikey

The double sets from the 1950's are some nice coins, but I worry about unscrupulous dealers replacing the original coins. Is there anyway to tell if they've been replaced. I know in the double sets, the 2 coins are obverse/reverse. How would they tone, i.e. will the exposed surfaces tone very differently from the covered surfaces??

thanks

TheNumish

Sometimes you can tell if a coin has been replaced. It's obvious when every coin in the set is toned and one or two coins are 100% brilliant. Also if the person isn't careful when taking the coins out they will tear the paper.

The times it's impossible to tell is when someone buys a deal with say ten sets and takes a few coins out of each set. Then they fill the sets back up with coins they didn't remove and end up with 7 complete sets. Since all the coins look the same you really can't tell.

nwcs

No way to easily tell, but each year of them had different color paper which toned the coins differently per year. So if you learn the colors they should tone you can probably figure out some measure of authenticity. And if the coins in the set exhibit the same patterns, that's at least a clue they might be genuine.

toners

Agree with NWCS, toning consistancy is the key, there will usually be different types of colors for each year set, in that different types of paper/tissue covers were used. But in orignal sets the toning should be about the same shades on the silver pieces for that year, if there is a drastic difference, then they are very suspect to being cherry picked and the good coins slabbed and the the set pieced back together for resale. Hope this helps, I have several beautiful toned sets that I know are orginal because they have been in the family since purchased from the mint, so this is what I am basing my info from and from seeing some of the piece milled sets that show up on EBAY that can bite you in the A$$.
Allen

Mikey

I keep seeing proof sets listed as mint sets. Here's an auction where the seller figured it out:




Text

Mikey

Here's an auction for a 1953 mint set that looks suspicious:

link

Clankeye

Well why, Mikey? I sincerely would like to know why this one sets your alarm off. It has all the original packaging including outer envelope... which doesn't prove anything, but... is it that some of the coins in one card are lightly toned... and others in the other cards are not? What's bothering you about it in particular?
Carl

gmarguli

Some original sets show NO toning or very little. The fact that they aren't heavily toned like normal is not proof that they are not original. I've also encountered several sets where the person wrapped the coins in plastic wrap or aluminum foil which was used to prevent the toning.

Mikey

<< <i>Well why, Mikey? I sincerely would like to know why this one sets your alarm off. It has all the original packaging including outer envelope... which doesn't prove anything, but... is it that some of the coins in one card are lightly toned... and others in the other cards are not? What's bothering you about it in particular?
Carl >>



I'm no expert. It's just the absence of toning.

Clankeye

Mikey--
I think Greg answered pretty well. The absence of toning isn't enough to conclude the coins aren't original to the set. Even white coins in mint sets I have found, have a look that gives you a good feel for if it's an original set. A lot of "replacement" coins stick out like a sore thumb. It sure isn't an exact science though. And at some point, you just have to take it on faith, and your own personal judgment if a set is original.
This 53 set to me doesn't scream "put together." It may be, but from the photos, it seems okay.
Carl