Indian Cent Error - Authentic?

Windycity · June 30, 2016 11:47PM

Here are images of a 1905 Indian Cent that appears to have been triple struck. Welcome opinions regarding authenticity.

FredWeinberg · July 1, 2016 12:37AM

I don't like the surfaces or strike of the

first, on-center strike, to begin with.

The Reverse first strike is also weak/mushy, and

the denticles on both sides are incomplete on all strikes.

The corrosion on the reverse hides, in the photo,

any casting marks that -might- be there.

It would have to be submitted, or shown to someone

at a show, to make a final determination, but based on

your photos, I strongly lean towards NG.

.....just my thoughts from what I can see.

BillJones · July 1, 2016 1:08AM

Shouldn't this thing, which should have struck out of the collar the second and third times, be less round than it is? The third strike also looks wierd with no border design.

I'd say NG. The green stuff in the middle of the date looks like the Chinese antiquing toning that they have placed on other examples of their products.

johnny9434 · July 1, 2016 1:16AM

ill agree with what fred said. to mushy and it looks funny to me. pass

DaveWcoins · July 1, 2016 1:45AM

I am in agreement with all here so far. The coin has been recolored, and the initial strike is so poor that it doesn't make sense to me.

But in-person examination is best to confirm whether or not it is authentic.

With 3 full dates showing -- and all in a line - it almost seems too good to be true.

TomB · July 1, 2016 2:01AM

My first impression is modern Alibaba.

seanq · July 1, 2016 2:03AM

I vote original coin triple struck with a false die. Too much of the underlying design exists under the second and third strikes for those to have been done my Mint equipment.

Sean Reynolds

291fifth · July 1, 2016 2:16AM

Red flags flying for this one ... now let's see ... what country has a red flag?

silverpop · July 1, 2016 2:33AM

pass

too many red flags on this item

asheland · July 1, 2016 2:49AM

It's real.

just kidding.

LindeDad · July 1, 2016 4:14AM

Originally posted by: TomB

My first impression is modern Alibaba.

BIGAL2749 · July 1, 2016 4:18AM

I really thinks it's false

Bodin · July 1, 2016 8:01AM

Sweet DOILY HOLDER!

CaptHenway · July 1, 2016 8:57AM

I am uncertain as to authenticity, but cannot condemn it based upon these pictures.Worth sending to a TPG.

jedm · July 1, 2016 2:01PM

Do such errors exist with as much wear? I am curious. I would think something this obvious would have been taken out of circulation much sooner. When I think about how many AU or better 1906 regular strike IHC's are taken from circulation, and they are not anything "special". That is what makes me suspect this specimen. as fake.

giantsfan20 · July 1, 2016 3:58PM

Sorry cannot scan photos from book "The numismtic Flying Eagle indian Lincoln Cent Errors by Michael Coleman Jr 1963 It has 3 pages of IC all various double strkes some of which have 2 dates and one with perfect date alingment with first coin.

Perhaps Fred W can comment on the authenticity of those .

pages 22-24

Unknown · July 1, 2016 4:11PM

This content has been removed.

Windycity · July 1, 2016 9:52PM

I will bring the coin to the Baltimore show to show to Fred and other experts.

roadrunner · July 1, 2016 10:38PM

Does it make sense for the 2nd strike which is in the center of the coin to have much sharper/less worn diamonds and necklace? The center of the coin typically would should show the highest wear areas....just the opposite here.

Shamika · July 1, 2016 10:56PM

If it's a fake, it fooled me.

BillJones · July 1, 2016 11:16PM

The reverse, especially has the Chinese fake type of surfaces.

I once saw a "1796 half cent struck over cut down 1796 large cent" fake that was similar to this.

ricko · July 2, 2016 12:56AM

This seems to be a fake from the Chinese market.... I agree with the 'red flags' noted above. I hope you post the final determination from the Baltimore show.. Cheers, RickO

CaptHenway · July 2, 2016 1:17AM

Originally posted by: roadrunner

Does it make sense for the 2nd strike which is in the center of the coin to have much sharper/less worn diamonds and necklace? The center of the coin typically would should show the highest wear areas....just the opposite here.

Just to play devil's advocate, the first strike would have raised up metal that then could have made the second strike stronger due to the already raised up metal filling into the die.

Would not be surprised if this was a Chinese counterfeit. They have obviously entered the error market as proven by the nails being offered. However, I still cannot condemn the piece based solely on these photos.

TD

Unknown · July 2, 2016 1:21AM

This content has been removed.

Indian Cent Error - Authentic?

Comments

Leave a Comment