Is this 1877 IHC real or fake?

MosesBlack

Please take a look and tell me what you think.

linky

danglen

Looks real to me. The second seven looks to be the same style as the first, with the top and the base slightly broader than the first seven. On the reverse, the lower portion of the N in ONE is considerably weaker than the other letters. I believe it's the real McCoy.

sinin1

The first 7 - looks funny - the top should be thicker I think

other diagnostics look good -> email seller and see if you can get closeup of date

Cam40

Even though the reverse diagnostics appear authentic,in this grade I would reserve judgment on the authenticity.It would really have to be looked at by someone at ANACS,(or the two top dogs where it could be bagged for damage) to be sure its real and not tooled or something.I dont know.Nonetheless .Its a cull I,d buy in a sec...for a great deal ofcourse.
Have it slabbed.

dorkkarl

appears genuine, i would actually grade ag-3, good plan, typical weaknes over "of amer", full rev. rim, not a bad coin at all. should slab just fine. i like it!

K S

goose3

I am going to be in the minority here. I think something looks Very fishy with the reverse around the normal weak area of the N. Looks almost tooled to me. maybe I'm just paranoid.

wheres Lakesamman or shylock!

MosesBlack

I agree with goose. The N looks to have been worked on to make it look weak. The 2nd 7 does not appear the same as some pics of certified 1877's.
Another question. If I have a coin worth several hundred dollars, why not get it certified?

FC57Coins

<< <i>If I have a coin worth several hundred dollars, why not get it certified? >>



In not an IHC guy - but I wondered if maybe the scratch on the obverse got it body bagged at one point.

Frank

dorkkarl

the nice thing about the 1877 in low/ag grades is that most all examples wear down w/ a very consistent pattern. i have looked at many of these, & the 1 in the ebay auction is perfectly consistent. in addition to the known characteristics (shape of the 2d "7", central rev. weakness), what i look for at the "ag" level:

(1) the rev almost always has full rims and appear to grade a perfect g-4, while the obv. will look like a low-end ag-3
(2) the wear pattern of the obv. is unique, "of am" is the first to go into the rim, then as it wears completel off, the lettering of "usa" on either side progressively wears into the rim, w/ "united" being the last to go. date tends to remain on this coin long after the "usa" is gone. i do not often observe this exact same wear pattern w/ other indians, but have no explanaition as to why the 1877 almost infallibly follows this exact wear pattern.

still, like others mentioned, i WOULD not be against slabing this coin for authenticity purposes only, but it grades an absolutely solid ag-3 imo, wouldn't surprise me if it got nailed down to fr-2, thoug. note that a perfect g-4 will almost always show full rev. rims, 2/3 obv rims w/ merging at "of amer".

K S

NumisEd

Hi everyone. I have heard that there were 3 or 4 obverse dies and as many as 6 reverse dies for the 1877 Inidan. How could all of the diffenent die marriages have the same wear pattern? I can't tell if this coin is genuine or counterfiet. I don't collect modern series such as Indian cents.

shylock

I don't like the look of the last 7. If you scroll down to the bottom of this page you'll see the date diagnostics. The stem, which should actually fall a bit lower than the first 7, appears very short on the Ebay coin. The serif on the left upper tip looks out of proportion, and overall it just doesn't look right in shape and thickness. Combined with the coinicidental damage to the lower N of ONE, as Goose noted, you have to wonder about this one without a closer look.

Lakesammman

Alright Goose, I'll step up and stick my neck out.

I guess I'd be nervous about it because of the second "7". The serif on the top left margin looks way too prominent when compared to the certified examples I've seen. The waist between the top horizontal part and stem looks too thick as well. The proportions are correct with regard to the second seven being a bit larger. The reverse is OK as is the wear pattern. I would suspect that the second seven is fake.

Go to ebay and pull up a certified 1877, this 1877, then minimize both. Pull one up one after the other and compare the characteristics of the real deal with this coin - it makes the comparison easier.

If I were bidding, I would ask for a return if it doesn't certify - there are some very convincing counterfeits out there.

MacCoin

I was going to say it looks real to me but after reading Skylocks post I say fake.


I will never agan trust a Ellsworth girl after my second exwife.

kobrakoins

Looks real to me.

Pushkin

I'm suspicious of this coin. Each of the diagnostics appear just a little unusual. The serif on the second "7", as noted by others, is strange,.
The "damage" to the "N" for the shallow diagnostic - coincidental? The positioning of the second "7" appears just a little off. None of these alone are necessarily conclusive from just looking at the picture - but my "gut" says be very careful with this coin. I wouldn't buy it, but I don't like to take risks where authenticity is even a little bit in question - and for 1877 there are a lot of counterfeits floating around, many of them in the lower grades.

Good luck.

shylock

This may help with comparing the last 7's:

coindaughter

They've got a bunch of other coins for sale, some of them recently certified by ANACS. If they knew which ones to send in, and didn't send this one, then maybe you're right to be suspicious.

Lakesammman

PS - I think the reverse is fine. The key for me are the serifs on the N's - these are fine and delicate like a shallow N should look, not the short fat stubby serifs seen on the "bold" N reverses. The only cheap 1870's coin readily available with the shallow N reverse is the 1870 - may have been made from one of these?? The first 7 looks fine so I think it was made from a 1870's era coin.

Thanks to Shylock for posting the pics - also look at the top margin of the 2nd "7", the upper horiz. portion. The little convex superior bump is missing, preserved on the first "7", another suspicious feature.

Hey Shylock - looks like we were working on this one about the same time!!

shylock

I guess sick minds think alike Lakesammman, even in different time zones. Was wondering what 1870s date could have been used but I think you nailed that with the 1870.

mr1931S

looks bogus to me...if i collected these i'd save my money for an unquestionably real one in better grade...

mr1931S

the second '7' is too low...it appears way too high in relief compared to the first '7'...looks like it was lifted off another 1870's Indian after being worked on some in an attempt to match the first '7' to me...

a dip in acetone and one might find that second '7' at the bottom of the beaker...