1795 Dollar - Genuine or Contemporary Counterfeit? WARNING LARGE PHOTOS

hiijacker · May 28, 2015 10:22AM

Want to get your thoughts if this is legitimate. It definitely sat in a collection for many years, so would be an old counterfeit if not genuine.

RIM EDGE PHOTOS

joebb21 · May 28, 2015 10:29AM

joebb21 · May 28, 2015 10:29AM

looks ok to me

pcgs69 · May 28, 2015 10:32AM

I vote genuine but cleaned with other damage, and in 3 months, fingerprints

WinLoseWin · May 28, 2015 10:38AM

Possibly holed and repaired near 12 o'clock?

commoncents05 · May 28, 2015 10:44AM

The coin has been repaired and polished, but I think it's the real deal. I don't know that I've seen a counterfeit with adjustment marks.

-Paul

CaptHenway · May 28, 2015 11:02AM

Gut feeling genuine, plugged, screwed, blued and tattooed.

mbogoman · May 28, 2015 11:04AM

<< Possibly holed and repaired near 12 o'clock? >>

That's what I thought, too. It looks rebuilt and re-engraved around "B E R"...

Eclectic · May 28, 2015 11:07AM

<< Gut feeling genuine, plugged, screwed, blued and tattooed. >>

MonsterCoinz · May 28, 2015 11:12AM

Banged up and bruised, but I like it. Why can't I find these anywhere?

Athena · May 28, 2015 12:09PM

Lived a hard life, but is now "affordable"

BustHalfBrian · May 28, 2015 3:57PM

Coin looks kosher but definitely not gradable. Surface dmg. + Environmental dmg.

TopographicOceans · May 28, 2015 4:27PM

<< I vote genuine but cleaned with other damage, and in 3 months, fingerprints

>>

hiijacker · May 28, 2015 8:04PM

Ok thanks guys. Knowing it's real what is a very reasonable price for such a coin?

I need to put a liquid fair value on it for a sale.

mr1931S · May 28, 2015 10:17PM

I'm not in the "it looks real" camp.My old eyes might be off some these days but the first thing I noticed was the date looks "fuzzy" to me.Dates on coins of this era always look "crisp,well-struck" even though other parts of the coin might not be so well-struck up?

Contemporary counterfeit of such a piece could be very deceptive? What is the weight? Diameter? Specific gravity?

"Practice coin.The real date we want to make is 1794."

It would be useful if we had photo of known to be genuine 1795 dollar to look at and compare to.Then I would be able to trust my old eyes a little more at the least.I would be able and willing to say that "she looks real" or "she looks fake" given that I have something to compare to.

mr1931S · May 28, 2015 10:23PM

I would add that the chunk of edge that is missing has revealed a cavity that looks really grainy...grainy like casted metal might be....

LanceNewmanOCC · May 28, 2015 10:59PM

<< The coin has been repaired and polished, but I think it's the real deal. I don't know that I've seen a counterfeit with adjustment marks.

-Paul >>

+1

my 2c

although the devices do look a bit uncrisp.

the hole on the edge looks to be near BER which others think may be a repair area.

i don't see the reverse repairing to match BER, so im also considering mount/ring removed which may account for the indent.

it is a good thing the edge devices are as weak as they are because 99% of the early dollar fakes i've seen have crisp, sharp edges despite the low overall

condition. an excellent counterfeit detection tip. if you see a super strong, even and crisp edge, you better be holding a monster of a coin and it may still not

even matter then because high-grade fakes also exhibit this "perfect edge."

i'm with the majority on this one in that i'd be surprised if it were a counterfeit, especially with what appears to be mmam like commoncents05 stated.

btw gratz on 10k+ posts common. i don't recall if there was a celebration thread.

last but not least, excellent overall presentation hijacker. right width, height, clarity and layout of the images.
.

BillJones · May 28, 2015 11:26PM

<< It would be useful if we had photo of known to be genuine 1795 dollar to look at and compare to. >>

Here are a couple.

And here is another.

joebb21 · May 28, 2015 11:29PM

value is between $1000-$1500

Probably closer to the lower end but still should be at least $1000

BustHalfBrian · May 29, 2015 12:31AM

<< value is between $1000-$1500

Probably closer to the lower end but still should be at least $1000 >>

A comparable coin recently sold for $1700 on eBay

asheland · May 29, 2015 12:33AM

It looks counterfeit to me.

mr1931S · May 29, 2015 12:43AM

I just can't get over how crude that date appears to me.Like it was worked on to appear bolder than it really was when it came out of the mold.Worked on in this case resulted in loss of detail.

The chip on the edge could have been caused by an instrument used for prying? The edge inscription presents additional problems for the would-be counterfeiter to address?

The piece should be sent in for authentication/grading.

LoveMyLiberty · May 29, 2015 5:05AM

The coin looks to me as a legitimate piece in very poor
condition.

It is a B-7, BB-18 three leaf variety. There are only six
1795 three leaf varieties of the 19 die marriages for this
year. Here is a copy of another BB-18 for comparison
found on CoinFacts.

However, as mr1874 said, it never hurts to check it's weight, diameter, etc.

mr1931S · May 29, 2015 5:47AM

hiijacker · May 29, 2015 6:02AM

looks like a match! Note how the lower curl loops and touches the star the same way.

mr1931S · May 29, 2015 6:16AM

Yes,a match.The date looks off? Note how the '1' on the OP piece flares to the right viewing from the bottom of the '1' to the top.I'm not seeing that in the '1' in the B-7,BB-18 posted by LoveMyLiberty.There the '1' appears to narrow slightly to the left as viewed from bottom to top.

EagleEye · May 29, 2015 6:23AM

It went through the Castaing machine twice.

Ronny · May 29, 2015 6:32AM

<< Want to get your thoughts if this is legitimate. It definitely sat in a collection for many years, so would be an old counterfeit if not genuine.

RIM EDGE PHOTOS

>>

WOWSA! Those are some large photos!

Cheers, RonO

tradedollarnut · May 29, 2015 6:42AM

Then why use the quote function?

winky · May 29, 2015 11:09AM

Fingerprints all over it but real to me.

mr1931S · May 29, 2015 1:20PM

Off to the TPG it goes if it's my coin.Would be interesting to see their findings in here.

mr1931S · May 29, 2015 1:32PM

It went through the Castaing machine twice.

Yes.Parts of the edge inscription stamped twice.

hiijacker · May 30, 2015 10:56PM

<< It went through the Castaing machine twice.

Yes.Parts of the edge inscription stamped twice. >>

What's a Castaing machine?

ebaybuyer · May 31, 2015 12:44AM

holed and repaired at 12:00 (ish) probably had more eye appeal before the repair

mr1931S · May 31, 2015 12:48AM

I took "Castaing" to be a misspelling of "casting."

steveben · May 31, 2015 12:56AM

<< 

<< It went through the Castaing machine twice.

Yes.Parts of the edge inscription stamped twice. >>

What's a Castaing machine? >>

Castaing Machine

mr1931S · May 31, 2015 1:08AM

The magic date,1795,jumps out and grabs you on this piece,

Can't say the same for the OP piece.The date is there such as it is but there's no captivation going on.MOFWIW

grip · May 31, 2015 1:46AM

Hard to tell if it's genuine or cast. Send it in for grading.

ebaybuyer · May 31, 2015 1:51AM

those who know, have already assured the op that it is genuine, just not original. would be a waste of money to send it in for grading, A it wont grade, B we already know its genuine

mr1931S · May 31, 2015 2:23AM

Not a waste of money to send in for authentication.Who cares if it doesn't grade? Is it real or not? We know the Bolender number but that's not proof the piece is authentic.Knowing when made might speak volumes about motive.What would "contemporary" mean for the OP's piece? 1800? 1810? 1820? I would say contemporary as far as they concern flowing hair dollars is probably around 1820-1830.That would have been about the time collectors were taking notice that 1794 dollars were seldom being seen.

Thank you steveben for the link to Castaing machine.

Rampage · May 31, 2015 2:31AM

I say Genuine, but as others have mentioned many times over, much damage.

BustHalfBrian · May 31, 2015 2:48AM

<< I took "Castaing" to be a misspelling of "casting." >>

It's actually a name, IIRC, not a misspelling of the word 'casting'.

mr1931S · May 31, 2015 4:00AM

It's actually a name, IIRC, not a misspelling of the word 'casting'.

Yes.My apologies to EagleEye for any confusion I may have caused.

NorthIdahoFree · August 21, 2015 11:08AM

Hi Hijacker,

This I am going to chime in -- my first post on the CU message boards!

I will cast my lot with the not genuine crowd. Three main reasons and two smaller reasons.

1) The surfaces have the kind of pitting one tends to see with castings. Though I am no uber expert, I just have never seen the kind of pitting you see on the head, above the head and to the right of the ribbon on the reverse but on counterfeit coins.

2) On the edge, there is a very suspicious casting marks (e.g. at 12:30 of the head). I once bought a Japanese "silver yen" coin in Tokyo, only to have my brother tell him the weight was too light. When I started investigating, the discussions mentioned comments that there is almost always an odd point where the casting is either injected or breaks off. Sure enough there is was. That mark on the edge looks very similar.

3) On the edge directly in line with the line of sight, there appears to be an odd planchet separation.

Finally,

4) I don;t line the look of the adjustment marks. I have a 1798 Large Eagle with adjustment marks I bought from the old Stacks store in NY. I love the history of why they are there. They are a simply cross hatch patterns, which makes sense if you think about how the ladies would file. This coin has a radiating pattern. Odd.

5) I do not like the look of the letters and date, but I am more of a Draped Bust guy than Flowing Hair.

But of course it is a 1795 FH. If real, it has taken 220 years of abuse. And of course being a 1795, it is in year two of US mint operations and all the drama and learning curve elements.

But my vote is 85-15 against.

Silly question, but did you weigh it and measure it?

Either way, I hope it worked out.

NIDF

1795 Dollar - Genuine or Contemporary Counterfeit? WARNING LARGE PHOTOS

Comments

Leave a Comment