Post your contemporary counterfeits

Boosibri · March 25, 2020 1:38PM

1776-Mo PR 2 Reales. Of course there is no such assayers as "P.R". The correct assayer combination would have been "F.M"

Sonorandesertrat · March 25, 2020 2:12PM

Micro-O variety. Struck on a sterling silver planchet, but its weight is spot on for a genuine Morgan.

habaraca · March 25, 2020 2:14PM

Sonorandesertrat · March 25, 2020 2:19PM

Weight: 10.1 gm (should be closer to 12.5 gm)

Sonorandesertrat · March 25, 2020 2:21PM

Circulated, with test marks and ca. 80% of the gold wash remaining. Reeded edge.

jayPem · March 25, 2020 2:22PM

@Sonorandesertrat said:
Micro-O variety. Struck on a sterling silver planchet, but its weight is spot on for a genuine Morgan.

Any idea why a contemporary counterfeit Morgan$ would be struck from Sterling silver??
Doesn't quite add up..they would almost certainly be made from a base metal and silver washed...
🤔

Sonorandesertrat · March 25, 2020 2:25PM

That is an excellent question, one that occurred to me. This is an issue that surfaces for the family of counterfeit micro-O Morgans. Maybe they were made to launder money or stolen silver goods?

Sonorandesertrat · March 25, 2020 2:31PM

1883 NC nickel, altered with gold plating (some remains) and then reeded to be passed as a half eagle.

burfle23 · March 25, 2020 2:42PM

My "Morgan":

Ronyahski · March 25, 2020 2:42PM

1837 Half Eagle. Formerly in Judd.

jayPem · March 25, 2020 3:13PM

There are a few in this drawer.
I'll take pics when I get home..

DRUNNER · March 25, 2020 3:14PM

Perhaps the most widely known of all-time, but so common they won't command a lot of premium respect . . . the "Henning"

DRUNNER · March 25, 2020 3:18PM

The Obverse . . . . . . .

Drunner

dcarr · March 25, 2020 3:18PM

@Sonorandesertrat said:
Micro-O variety. Struck on a sterling silver planchet, but its weight is spot on for a genuine Morgan.

Technically, that one is not a "micro-o". But it is related to the "micro-o" family of vintage counterfeits because it was probably made by the same entity. It appears to be a VAM-13.

Sonorandesertrat · March 25, 2020 3:25PM

1843-O Counterfeit eagle. Produced using a copper planchet, which was gold-plated. Well circulated, VGish.

Sonorandesertrat · March 25, 2020 3:26PM

Counterfeit. Davignon 3-C

Sonorandesertrat · March 25, 2020 3:28PM

@dcarr said:

@Sonorandesertrat said:
Micro-O variety. Struck on a sterling silver planchet, but its weight is spot on for a genuine Morgan.

Technically, that one is not a "micro-o". But it is related to the "micro-o" family of vintage counterfeits because it was probably made by the same entity. It appears to be a VAM-13.

I agree (with both points).

RKKay · March 25, 2020 4:19PM

Sonorandesertrat · March 25, 2020 4:30PM

RKKay,
Do you have any idea who might have made your electrotypes? Were their seams well-smoothed, or still evident?

dcarr · March 25, 2020 4:33PM

How about some "mint state" vintage counterfeits ?

1944 [no-"P"] Henning Nickel (yes, this is how they looked right off the die):

1896-o Micro-o, VAM-4 (the single highest grade known for any VAM-listed vintage counterfeit):

Sonorandesertrat · March 25, 2020 4:35PM

@DRUNNER said:

Perhaps the most widely known of all-time, but so common they won't command a lot of premium respect . . . the "Henning"

A set of the various Henning counterfeit nickels would (hint....).

coinkat · March 25, 2020 4:37PM

I found an 1853 gold dollar that is similar to the 1852 2 1/2 that was posted earlier in the thread

RKKay · March 25, 2020 4:39PM

@Sonorandesertrat said:
RKKay,
Do you have any idea who might have made your electrotypes? Were their seams well-smoothed, or still evident?

I have no idea who made them. I don't recall if the scrawny eagle has a readily apparent seam. It is in an ICG slab noting that it is not genuine. The 1854 is pretty well smoothed over.

dcarr · March 25, 2020 4:41PM

Another of my favorites:
1853 3-cent from hand-cut dies. Surprisingly, it is not made of silver even though it has a perfect circulated silver look:

Sonorandesertrat · March 25, 2020 4:45PM

@RKKay said:

@Sonorandesertrat said:
RKKay,
Do you have any idea who might have made your electrotypes? Were their seams well-smoothed, or still evident?

I have no idea who made them. I don't recall if the scrawny eagle has a readily apparent seam. It is in an ICG slab noting that it is not genuine. The 1854 is pretty well smoothed over.

@RKKay said:

@Sonorandesertrat said:
RKKay,
Do you have any idea who might have made your electrotypes? Were their seams well-smoothed, or still evident?

I have no idea who made them. I don't recall if the scrawny eagle has a readily apparent seam. It is in an ICG slab noting that it is not genuine. The 1854 is pretty well smoothed over.

The reason why I asked is because the host coins were patterns, and this might allow one to guess who owned them (based on studying plates in old auction catalogs) and possibly who might have made the electrotypes.

RKKay · March 25, 2020 4:50PM

@Sonorandesertrat said:

@RKKay said:

@Sonorandesertrat said:
RKKay,
Do you have any idea who might have made your electrotypes? Were their seams well-smoothed, or still evident?

I have no idea who made them. I don't recall if the scrawny eagle has a readily apparent seam. It is in an ICG slab noting that it is not genuine. The 1854 is pretty well smoothed over.

@RKKay said:

@Sonorandesertrat said:
RKKay,
Do you have any idea who might have made your electrotypes? Were their seams well-smoothed, or still evident?

I have no idea who made them. I don't recall if the scrawny eagle has a readily apparent seam. It is in an ICG slab noting that it is not genuine. The 1854 is pretty well smoothed over.

The reason why I asked is because the host coins were patterns, and this might allow one to guess who owned them (based on studying plates in old auction catalogs) and possibly who might have made the electrotypes.

Sorry. I have no idea. I just thought they were cool and went no further. Are you studying fake patterns?

Sonorandesertrat · March 25, 2020 4:54PM

I have an interest in antique electrotypes (U. S. and British coins, the technology, and appearances in numismatic literature).

relicsncoins · March 25, 2020 5:04PM

This is counterfeit. Not sure how old, probably a modern Chinese counterfeit.

jayPem · March 25, 2020 5:09PM

jayPem · March 25, 2020 5:11PM

Sonorandesertrat · March 25, 2020 5:36PM

1721 9 deniers. Referred to as a 'Louisiana Copper' in some 19th century auction catalogs, due to circulation in the Midwest. This piece, now raw, was removed from a PCGS slab (EF grade, deemed genuine). It is actually a deceptively well-made electrotype.

jwitten · March 25, 2020 6:12PM

SaorAlba · March 25, 2020 6:18PM

The Micro-O Morgan counterfeits were monetary counterfeits, likely made in the early to mid 1930s when silver was about 25c an ounce. The higher percentage of silver, ie near or at sterling was likely due to not being able to adequately refine the silver with the equipment the forgers had. The great majority of the Micro-O coins are well circulated - as though they were aged/worn in tumblers or drums to give them the look of having circulated. As opposed to the Henning nickels which the Secret Service is said of have opinned that it likely cost Henning more to make than he benefited from them - ie he lost money - the Micro-O's are good enough that they fooled people for over half a century.

ChopmarkedTrades · March 25, 2020 8:22PM

Contemporary Chinese counterfeit of a Netherlands Ducaton, nonsense date and legends. Chopmarked. Difficult to pin down a date of manufacture, anywhere from the 18th-19th centuries. “Imitation dollars” were made at Canton by individuals with permission of the officials. It is said that the Provincial Treasurer once ordered the silversmiths to make dollar pieces “like those made by the foreigners” in Ch’ien-lung’s reign (1735-1795). This order caused trouble. Profit led the silversmiths to use more alloy until they got to mixing five parts of alloy with eight parts silver. The result was that these coins soon depreciated in the market and subsequently orders were issued to prohibit private coining.

jayPem · March 25, 2020 8:49PM

That one is very cool 👆

ricko · March 26, 2020 7:58AM

Wrong thread....Cheers, RickO

DennisH · March 26, 2020 8:16AM

Mr. Carr:

Your 1896-O VAM 4 Morgan is... well... "incredible, amazing, jaw-dropping" doesn't come close to my reaction when I saw it. I've owned and examined many micro-Os for over 20 years, and some of them in high grades, but I've never seen one that comes remotely close to yours. I would very much love to hear about it.

-- Dennis

Lakesammman · March 26, 2020 9:41AM

Both said to be mint made - purchased from JK.

ricko · March 26, 2020 9:56AM

Here is a counterfeit Morgan....I picked it up at a local antique shop...heavily discounted when I pointed out the fact that there were NO 1902CC Morgans...Cheers, RickO

Bliggity · March 27, 2020 8:01AM

Here is (what I believe to be) a 19th Century electrotype of a 1796 C-2 half cent that I purchased a few months ago. I'll never be able to own a real 1796, so I figured this would be a good way to fill the hole in the Dansco.

SaorAlba · March 27, 2020 12:26PM

The Henning is one of several I own.

And then there is this 50-55 year old creation, apparently cast in lead or some kind of pot metal

oih82w8 · March 27, 2020 2:12PM

Here are my 7070 of chinese Counterfeits, i don't believe that these can be characterized as "contemporary", but...;

SaorAlba · April 15, 2020 2:09PM

One I found the other day whilst organising my collection. This is a 1950 apparently cast in lead and then chrome plated.

MrEureka · April 15, 2020 3:06PM

@jayPem said:

@Sonorandesertrat said:
Micro-O variety. Struck on a sterling silver planchet, but its weight is spot on for a genuine Morgan.

Any idea why a contemporary counterfeit Morgan$ would be struck from Sterling silver??
Doesn't quite add up..they would almost certainly be made from a base metal and silver washed...
🤔

This should explain it.

Sonorandesertrat · April 15, 2020 5:18PM

Mr. Eureka,
That plot only offers part of a convincing explanation. Silver fell after WWI (relative to 1900) and didn't recover until midway into WWII. The counterfeiters did not lose money by using sterling silver, but they left plenty on the table. Why did they do that? Because they didn't want to have to refine scrap sterling silver? Was this issue a question of small numbers of blanks needed (driving up refining costs) or were the counterfeit dollars part of a money-laundering scheme? There are unanswered questions, in my opinion.

cmerlo1 · April 15, 2020 5:24PM

cmerlo1 · April 15, 2020 5:26PM

cmerlo1 · April 15, 2020 5:28PM

Boosibri · April 15, 2020 6:34PM

Wonder if you could do a 7070 of contemporary counterfeits. Early copper and silver might be more scare that the real coins themselves

Legacy · April 15, 2020 6:44PM

This is a contemporary counterfeit half once owned by my great grandfather, a Civil War veteran. It is made of lead and is lighter than the real thing. Images by Gerry Fortin and listed in the LSCC Contemporary Counterfeit archives.

Sonorandesertrat · April 15, 2020 8:13PM

@Boosibri said:
Wonder if you could do a 7070 of contemporary counterfeits. Early copper and silver might be more scare that the real coins themselves

I have given some thought to doing just that. I think that recent coins would be the real problems.

Post your contemporary counterfeits

Comments

Leave a Comment

Categories