1909S VDB Lincoln Cent Guess the Grade!

Coins299

Apologies for the "store number" text.

How much would you think its worth, and would grade?

Thanks.

Alltheabove76

Id grade it: Chinese

STONE

Depends if it's real of not!

MsMorrisine

GTG on fakes is old now, especially since there was a thread on a counterfeit selling web site.


You forgot to mention the fake VDB

Coins299

<< <i>GTG on fakes is old now, especially since there was a thread on a counterfeit selling web site.


You forgot to mention the fake VDB >>



Did I?

MsMorrisine

Just missed it.

okracer

<< <i>GTG on fakes is old now, especially since there was a thread on a counterfeit selling web site.


You forgot to mention the fake VDB >>



.....I can't see the full "VDB" beneath the store numbers.........

nwcoast

I don't see the little die crack/chip in the upper recess of the S serif...

Coins299

Is this a real cent with a fake s added?

AUandAG

I don't believe that this is a real example. S looks off and the dot after the D is not centered.

bob

tightbudget

Not genuine

lkeigwin

<< <i>I don't believe that this is a real example. S looks off and the dot after the D is not centered.

bob >>

The position of the dot after the D is much like it is on a non-S VDB, isn't it? And the S does look wrong.

My guess is it's an added mintmark.
Lance.

lostincoins

Here are 4 known 1909-2 vdb mint marks

mr1931S

I would be a buyer at $1 given that the fake is close to same size and weight as a genuine U.S. small cent.The date looks funky and I can tell that the "s" is in the wrong position and has the improper tilt for die #1 which it is pretending to come from.

I would use it as a teaching tool.Only one of these would be needed for that purpose though.

DennisH

Fake.

BustHalfBrian

<< <i>

<< <i>I don't believe that this is a real example. S looks off and the dot after the D is not centered.

bob >>

The position of the dot after the D is much like it is on a non-S VDB, isn't it? And the S does look wrong.

My guess is it's an added mintmark.
Lance. >>



I think the whole coin is fake, not just the mintmark.

mr1931S

The whole coin is fake.It's a die struck Chinese counterfeit of mediocre quality,in my opinion.Mediocre mostly because it doesn't have "COPY" stamped on it.Of course,I haven't seen the edge.

Maybe they put "COPY" on the edge so that collectors aren't fooled by it.

I would have "COPY" engraved on the edge of my specimen that I pay $1 for.

ricko

I agree... not genuine.... do not see enough of the vdb, but the mm/date is a giveaway... Cheers, RickO

AUandAG

<< <i>The whole coin is fake.It's a die struck Chinese counterfeit of mediocre quality,in my opinion.Mediocre mostly because it doesn't have "COPY" stamped on it.Of course,I haven't seen the edge.

Maybe they put "COPY" on the edge so that collectors aren't fooled by it.

I would have "COPY" engraved on the edge of my specimen that I pay $1 for. >>



Can't put copy on the edge of a coin and still meet the requirements of the Hobby Protection Act. It must
be on the face of the coin (front or back but not edge).
bob

OldEastside

Looks like it came from the same place that made my 1877 IHC Coaster

Steve

mr1931S

Can't put copy on the edge of a coin and still meet the requirements of the Hobby Protection Act. It must
be on the face of the coin (front or back but not edge).
bob

I have "COPY" put on my piece so that it still doesn't comply with the requirements you mention.I don't want to ruin a perfectly good example of counterfeit by putting "COPY" in a prominent place.

"FAKE" might be a better word to use than "COPY."

renomedphys

Nice to know I'm in the same camp as you guys. At first glance, the shape of the serif on the S looks OK, but the shape of the S itself is wrong. The VDB is wrong. Add to that the overall look of the coin is WRONG. Looking closer, the serif really just looks like a blob.

Is it even copper?

kimber45ACP

I think the S is legit, and the coin was added to it.

blacksmoke

It looks like "BUS" in "PLURIBUS" is tilted back a little from the other letters. I don't know enough about these yet to know if those letters are tilted on a genuine coin so, just putting in my one cents worth.

braddick

We all know it is not genuine, including the OP, yet no one has responded to his thread title inquiry. I will grade it MS62. Perhaps AU58 if that is light wear.

braddick

Oh, and as far as worth: these routinely sell for $1.89 on that website but does require a minimum of ten purchased.

johnny9434

bogus

mr1931S

I thought about trying to assign a grade to it but then realized that it doesn't deserve a grade since it's not a US Mint product.Grades should be for authentic coins,in my opinion.It's not even legitimate to call the piece that is the subject of this thread a coin.

If the grading service were to slab pieces such as this,the only designation it should receive is "Counterfeit."

I can have one of these for $1.89 but have to buy ten?

lkeigwin

<< <i>I thought about trying to assign a grade to it but then realized that it doesn't deserve a grade since it's not a US Mint product.Grades should be for authentic coins,in my opinion.It's not even legitimate to call the piece that is the subject of this thread a coin.

If the grading service were to slab pieces such as this,the only designation it should receive is "Counterfeit."

I can have one of these for $1.89 but have to buy ten?

>>

Not to be a nit picker, but the TPG's won't say "counterfeit" for legal reasons, according to DW. Instead it would get "questionable authenticity" or, at best, one of these.
Lance.

mr1931S

So the TPG,the entity that has the tools and expertise to best identify counterfeits,has to prance around the most fitting word to use for the counterfeit.That is sorry,in my opinion.

Type2

They should take them and give them to the Mint police.