Grade My New Liberty Double Eagle...

Comments

• STONE Posts: 15,275 ✭

  November 11, 2007 12:21PM

  I believe we have an MS-60 candidate.

  0
• tightbudget Posts: 7,299 ✭✭✭

  November 11, 2007 12:23PM

  AU58

  0
• Type2 Posts: 13,985 ✭✭✭✭✭

  November 11, 2007 12:28PM

  I dont know looks not right to me but that is just me. AU-58

  
  
  Hoard the keys.

  0
• Arizonadesertrat Posts: 566 ✭

  November 11, 2007 1:54PM

  If you purchased this raw, I strongly encourage you to have someone with experience in grading Liberty double eagles look at it. Something doesn't look right to me, but I only own 3 and am not an expert in this series. Look closely at the reverse in particular, many design features look strangely mushy, the right scroll doesn't look quite right (especially around the M in UNUM). This coin doesn't have the characteristics of the counterfeit 1894 double eagle that is discussed by Bill Fivaz in "United States Gold Counterfeit Detection Guide," however.

  0
• lkenefic Posts: 8,518 ✭✭✭✭✭

  November 11, 2007 1:58PM

  I'm certainly no expert either but I think AZ has a couple of good points... I'd at least weight it and bring it int a trusted dealer...L

  Collecting: Dansco 7070; Middle Date Large Cents (VF-AU); Box of 20;
  
  Successful BST transactions with: SilverEagles92; Ahrensdad; Smitty; GregHansen; Lablade; Mercury10c; copperflopper; whatsup; KISHU1; scrapman1077, crispy, canadanz, smallchange, robkool, Mission16, ranshdow, ibzman350, Fallguy, Collectorcoins, SurfinxHI, jwitten, Walkerguy21D, dsessom.

  0
• Cladiator Posts: 18,226 ✭✭✭✭✭

  November 11, 2007 2:09PM

  Eyebrow area looks odd to me.

  0
• GoldenEyeNumismatics Posts: 13,187 ✭✭✭

  November 11, 2007 2:12PM

  looks authentic to me.

  0
• DennisH Posts: 14,010 ✭✭✭✭✭

  November 11, 2007 2:14PM

  MS61
  

  When in doubt, don't.

  0
• bottleguy Posts: 354

  November 11, 2007 2:14PM

  Well, it was purchased raw from a trusted dealer.... I don't doubt it's authenticity. There was no grade given and I figured at least AU, but for the price it was better looking than a few others I looked at.
  
  Here's some pics of the same coin with different lighting....
  
  
  
  
  
  BTW, didn't know these were counterfeited... if this one is, I better get back to the dealer, soon!
  
  Thanks,
  
  Rick

  0
• Arizonadesertrat Posts: 566 ✭

  November 11, 2007 3:14PM

  I don't see any mention of this date being counterfeited in my reference books, but many were (and not all of them are discussed in Fivaz' book). As a precaution, have your coin weighed and look at it carefully to see if there are tool marks near letters, the date, or design elements. There shouldn't be any.

  0
• lordmarcovan Posts: 43,688 ✭✭✭✭✭

  November 11, 2007 3:56PM

  58 if there's some slight rub there; 60 otherwise. Scuffy and baggy, to be sure, but that's not so unusual. Actually, I had a similar piece in a PCGS MS62 holder. It had no business in a 62 holder, but 61 wouldn't have been out of the question. Gold is soft, of course, so I guess these big, heavy coins get some leeway in terms of marks. By contrast, in the same type set, I had a $2.50 Liberty in a PCGS MS62 holder that was absolutely gorgeous, with practically no marks visible to the naked eye. It was even semi-prooflike. They were really tough on it.

  
  
  

  0
• Cam40 Posts: 8,146 ✭

  November 11, 2007 4:00PM

  au55
  

  0