Options
Calling all SLQ Experts
AMRC
Posts: 4,280 ✭✭✭✭✭
AMRC
Posts: 4,280 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
Can we get a better, closer up, sharper photo?
(and one of the reverse too, if possible)
Looks like a cast to me
The color looks off
It looks like a cast counterfeit to me too.
When Fred asks we listen!
...that's why I asked for a reverse photo too.
I'd say NG now
I'm going to play Devil's advocate. I'm not 100% convinced the coin is a counterfeit. The piece is NOT CAST. The "0" is damaged and metal is pushed over.
Wait until a coin show and get an opinion from someone who can examine the actual coin or send it for authentication.
Yeah, That looks like a ground find to me.
NG meaning not genuine?
How else would you explain the grainy, funky surfaces?
I thought it was a cast counterfeit too based on the first image.
Seeing the additional photos it was most likely a 1930-s someone recut all digits in the date.
A lot of idiotic work when the 27-s is the bigger money date in lower grade.
Yea, sorry.... NG = No Good
(imo, based on the photos only)
I'm in the genuine but buried and damaged group. The entire bottom portion of the date plus the denticles below look to have been pushed.
The surfaces ARE NOT grainy but the posted image is. They ARE funky due to corrosion.
First glance. Striking similar to other cast counterfeits
I think it is a genuine 1926-S coin that is slightly distorted and eroded due to having been in a fire (and then cleaned up).
Dan is right, it's a 26-s. Note the serif on the 1. That wouldn't be present on a 20-s. However, I think it maybe was intentional alteration followed by some damage to hide the work.
Aercus Numismatics - Certified coins for sale
Counterfeit with PMD on the date.
It looks - to me - as if someone attempted to alter the date... but there is also PMD.... Cheers, RickO
All of the above......After all it's only worth the silver value with that damage/corrosion.
bob
What they said.....
it's crackers to slip a rozzer the dropsy in snide
Just checked Ali, it looks very similar to the ones they have.
I am pretty sure it is NOT a cast counterfeit. It weighs out, and it does not set off my numisdar. I also think it may very well be post mint damage after looking at it carefully. The abrasion lines "flow" in that exact direction and the damage looks to have been some type of parallel shearing as opposed to local hit.
This was a lot of fun, thanks everyone for your comments.
"Calling All SLQ Experts"
I'm out.
I don't think it's an altered original.
I don't think it's genuine.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
Looks fake to me.
@AMRC
"I am pretty sure it is NOT a cast counterfeit. It weighs out,"
Weight can be spot on with many of the counterfeits. Several things look off on this coin. The initial M on the obverse should show better, even on very low grades it can still be seen. The details on the shield are poor even for a weak strike coin. Her hand, sash & olive branch area doesn't look quite right. The right vertical for the date pedestal step is rounded off and does not come to a corner. There are a few other things but this should be enough to start with. I would encourage you to look at photos on ebay and here on coinfacts and compare your coin. Look at all grades and see what details you should be seeing for different grades & strike. You have the coin in hand and I do not so I could be wrong.
just my 2 cents
Send it to ICG! Let Skip examine it under his electron microscope.
@insider2