Flood of counterfeit trade dollars

shirohniichan

Gerry Fortin wrote an article in this quarter's Gobrecht Journal about counterfeit trade dollars he found in Shanghai. He said since they were so available, they'll show up all over.

Here's one (not on his list) currently on eBay.

Can anyone see the tell-tale signs it's not genuine? The biggest clue is on the reverse.

nwcs

To me it is the denticles and the design elements within the devices that give it away. I don't spend much time in this series, but I'll be sure to go certified if I do.

tradedollarnut

Broken seriphs on the E's and F's in United States of America. Crude 0's in 420 grains, 900 fine.

shirohniichan

The broken serifs on a type 1 reverse didn't bother me (my genuine example has them), but look for what is missing.

tradedollarnut

Those aren't just broken seriphs - they are missing completely because the copy die didn't pick them up (just like the period after FINE).

gmarguli

Neat Looking Trade Dollar Pattern that has nothing at all to do with this thread.

nwcs

And the berries aren't clearly separated and merge into the stems more. A very poor copy.

greghansen

No period after 'FINE'

shirohniichan

greghansen hit upon the tell-tale sign I was referring to. I've seen others with this same defect (most recently a counterfeit 1874-S).

tradedollarnut

The missing period after FINE is not in of itself a clear indicator of the coin being counterfeit. If you look in Bowers' Trade Dollar Encyclopedia, the picture of an 1876CC DDR shows a missing period, also.

tradedollarnut

1876-CC ANACS MS60 with missing period:

See link below in Greg's post

shirohniichan

Yea, verily. When you add up the fact that it has poor definition, odd rims, missing serifs, and a missing period, you have a pretty good indication that the coin in question is not genuine.

tradedollarnut

Agreed!

shirohniichan

The interesting thing is that the missing period turns up on counterfeits of different dates and mintmarks. I can't remember which one Gerry listed with the same defect, but I'm sure it wasn't an 1876-P or an 1874-S.

The funniest ones he found were the 1882-S and 1883-S trade dollars. They've shown up on eBay for a while now, but the impossible date and mintmark combo has made those only a minor threat.

BTW, I sent a friendly note to the seller that the coin is a counterfeit. Let's hope he takes it nicely.

gmarguli

1876-CC ANACS MS60 with missing period:

ANACS slabbed a counterfeit! Just kidding. Is this the only date that is common with the missing period?

gmarguli

Fixed link for TradeDollarNut

dragon

That coin looks way "off" at very first glance.

dragon

shirohniichan

The seller of the coin I linked agreed with me and cancelled the auction.

DaveG

And did you also note the ad in which Mr. Fortin offered to sell Shanghai counterfeits?

$18 each or a set of six different for $100.

shirohniichan

I might just have to buy a '75-CC to see how close it resembles the real deal.

berylcoin

I just posted some updates and a scan in another thread involving an initially suspect Trade dollar.

Other Trade $ thread

BC

cointagious

here's a fake key date trade $ just ending on ebay. some poor soul is upside down to the tune of $112.75. for some reason i'm beginning to believe that these fakes are being resold at flee markets around the country to the really unsuspecting hobbiests that just once don't look close enough.

cointagious

fake 1878-cc trade $ on ebay

shirohniichan

A type 1 reverse narrow MM 1878-CC! WOW! I bet it's unique!

cointagious

guaranteed genuine, too! such a deal! at $112.75 it would the deal of the year.

tradedollarnut

More fakes:

1875-S chopmark

Note the shape of the 5 in the date - it's incorrect.

1878-CC

This looks to be a base metal copy.

shirohniichan

The mintmark on the chopmarked 1875-S almost didn't show. Only one chopmark on it looks real. I wonder how one can distinguish a contemporary counterfeit with one made decades later.