Counterfeit 1854 Type 2 Gold $1?

rjsvt · November 22, 2006 9:27AM

I purchased this gold dollar online in an older PCGS slab. I've got the US Gold Counterfeit Detection Guide by Bill Fivaz so I checked the pics of known counterfeits. I see the exact same raised blemishes on the obverse as shown in the 1854 $1 Example 4. However, I don't see any of the marks specified on the reverse. The coin also has lots of clash marks, which I thought made it more likely to be authentic.

Obverse..

Reverse...

Blemishes around UNITED...

QX5...

Could this be a counterfeit? I'm not sure if those raised blemishes occur in real coins and were transfered to the counterfeit dies or if they are unique to fakes.
If it is counterfeit, should I return it, send it to PCGS, or keep it?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

Bob

sliderider · November 22, 2006 9:47AM

It does look as though PCGS let one slip through, doesn't it?? Odds are if you return it to them, it will mysteriously get lost in the mail so they won't have to admit they screwed up. I would make a very public stink about it first so at least a lot of people know that a possible counterfeit found it's way into PCGS plastic.

MrEureka · November 22, 2006 9:51AM

May we please see the whole coin before we offer opinions?

coinguy1 · November 22, 2006 9:55AM

<< <i>It does look as though PCGS let one slip through, doesn't it?? >>

Not at this (early) point, without images of the whole coin.

<<Odds are if you return it to them, it will mysteriously get lost in the mail so they won't have to admit they screwed up. I would make a very public stink about it first so at least a lot of people know that a possible counterfeit found it's way into PCGS plastic. >>

That sounded like a baseless accusation and bad advice, all in one.

Edited to add: I have not yet seen a counterfeit coin struck from clashed dies and have heard the same from others.

rjsvt · November 22, 2006 9:59AM

I changed the links so the whole coin pics are shown. Sorry, my photography is very poor.

Bob

coinguy1 · November 22, 2006 10:01AM

Based upon the new images I'd take the genuine side of the action.

MrEureka · November 22, 2006 10:03AM

Looks OK to me.

RYK · November 22, 2006 10:08AM

Looks like a decent, original, authentic Type II G$1 to me.

jdimmick · November 22, 2006 10:43AM

That coin is genuine based on what I see. I see nothing that leads me to beleive its a counterfeit.

rjsvt · November 22, 2006 11:04AM

Thanks for all the replies. I'm feeling a lot better, especially since I most likely paid too much for it.

Can someone explain why the "known counterfeit" has the exact same marks as my coin? The only thing that makes sense to me, is the marks were on a real die, made it to my real coin, then were transferred to a counterfeit die. Or the book is wrong?

Anyone want to guess the current grade on the PCGS slab?

Thanks again.

Bob

GoldenEyeNumismatics · November 22, 2006 11:15AM

looks genuine, but maybe I'm wrong. Nice find, though

ziggy29 · November 22, 2006 11:20AM

<< <i>Can someone explain why the "known counterfeit" has the exact same marks as my coin? The only thing that makes sense to me, is the marks were on a real die, made it to my real coin, then were transferred to a counterfeit die. Or the book is wrong? >>

A raised area that is repeated on a lot of coins could be a die imperfection, a little ding in the die that results in a raised area on many coins. If one of those many authentic coins were used to create counterfeit dies or spark erosion counterfeits, it would have the same raised area as the genuine coins.

Repeating *depressions*, on the other hand, are usually the sign of a counterfeit. When that happens, usually a coin with post-mint damage is used to create dies which result in a raised area on the die, which creates the repeated depression on all the coins struck with that counterfeit die.

To summarize: Repeated raised areas -- possibly okay. Repeated depressions -- almost certainly counterfeit.

michael · November 22, 2006 12:28PM

well after the fact looks like a genuine original mint product to me

but it is definately one ugly mother grabber eye appeal wise

michael · November 22, 2006 12:28PM

DeusExMachina · November 22, 2006 1:16PM

This is for the experts:

I went and grabbed my Fivaz book and tried to figure this one out on my own. 2 things stood out 1. The "S" in states on the obverse and the "L"s on the reverse (in dollar). Both seem mushy--which is one the diagnostics for a counterfeit.

Logic tells me that this coin is real b/c it is circulated and PCGS graded it. Can the people who responded that the coin was real explain their thought process or what tipped them off?

Thanks.

coinguy1 · November 23, 2006 2:25AM

<< <i>This is for the experts:

I went and grabbed my Fivaz book and tried to figure this one out on my own. 2 things stood out 1. The "S" in states on the obverse and the "L"s on the reverse (in dollar). Both seem mushy--which is one the diagnostics for a counterfeit.

Logic tells me that this coin is real b/c it is circulated and PCGS graded it. Can the people who responded that the coin was real explain their thought process or what tipped them off?

Thanks. >>

Different people have different methods for determining whether coins are counterfeit or not. Speaking for myself only, I try to get a good look at the entire coin, rather than focusing on one small area, and see if anything strikes me as out of the ordinary.

I check to see if the design details look normal/correct. I look at the strike, as many counterfeits look to be unworn, yet display the details of a circulated coin. I look at the texture of the surfaces to see if there are the expected differences between the fields and the devices - often counterfeits are too even/uniform in that respect. I look for copper spots, as supposedly counterfeits don't have them. Ditto for clashed dies. Many times counterfeits don't display the expected bag-marks/abrasions that a genuine coin will. And then there are specific diagnostics to look for which particular counterfeits have.

RYK · November 23, 2006 2:30AM

<< <i>This is for the experts:

I went and grabbed my Fivaz book and tried to figure this one out on my own. 2 things stood out 1. The "S" in states on the obverse and the "L"s on the reverse (in dollar). Both seem mushy--which is one the diagnostics for a counterfeit.

Logic tells me that this coin is real b/c it is circulated and PCGS graded it. Can the people who responded that the coin was real explain their thought process or what tipped them off?

Thanks. >>

I have learned to check and see what Andy and Mark have posted and then agree with them because they are more experienced and knowledgeable than me.

Actually, nothing caught my eye as being suspicious, and PCGS did grade it. As discussed in the other threads, maybe 1 in 100,000 graded by PCGS are counterfeit.

BillJones · November 23, 2006 4:47AM

A number of these 1854 Type II gold dollars were struck with rusted dies. I once owned a piece that was perhaps an MS-65, it had rust marks all over the outside of the obverse.

I'd vote genuine on this piece.

FredWeinberg · November 23, 2006 5:02AM

This piece is genuine; it has
the charactoristics of many
of the Type 2 "overused/worn"
dies....

No question - genuine.......imo

Counterfeit 1854 Type 2 Gold $1?

Comments

Leave a Comment