Options
Are these Morgans fake? Opinions please
options26
Posts: 1,431
I recently bought a bunch of Morgans for a little over melt and these 2 came in the group. Both are really wierd looking. The 99 has no reeding (maybe worn off?) and the 88 looks almost like it was cast or something (Reeding looks odd but not bad, maybe wear) They are made of silver. Sorry for the big pics, just wanted you to have a clear look at them for an opinion.
The reverse of the 88 looks pretty good if it's a fake, maybe I found Ash Harrisons new holy grail 88-O VAM? lol
The 99 does look blury like that in person.
The reverse of the 88 looks pretty good if it's a fake, maybe I found Ash Harrisons new holy grail 88-O VAM? lol
The 99 does look blury like that in person.
Life member of the SSDC
0
Comments
-Paul
Couldn't say for sure on either one without seeing them.
TD
<< <i>The 1899-S is probably genuine and the 1888-O is probably a contemporary non-silver counterfeit.
Couldn't say for sure on either one without seeing them.
TD >>
The 88-o is silver, I know that ring a mile away. The only thing I question on the 88 is the reverse, sure seems good for a cast fake. Could it have been made from very old rusty dies?
Stefanie
.
CoinsAreFun Toned Silver Eagle Proof Album
.
Gallery Mint Museum, Ron Landis& Joe Rust, The beginnings of the Golden Dollar
.
More CoinsAreFun Pictorials NGC
www.brunkauctions.com
The 99 looks highly abused to the point where it is difficult for me to tell. But it sure looks mushier than any worn morgan i've seen. No reeding? Yikes.
It's a closer call, but I keep coming back to the fact that i've never seen a worn morgan that looks like this. The text and stars should remain relatively sharp even with wear. This one looks mashed.
I vote that you have found a pair of fakes.
[edit] Never really thought about acid etching. Is that what happens when you drop a coin into a jar of dip and forget about it?
The '99 also looks fake, but I am less certain of it.
Since you bought them for melt-ish, I say hey, maybe you did OK. I once bought a pretty good fake Peace dollar for a buck or two below melt, and ended up actually doing OK on it. If they can be proven to be contemporary fakes, then hey- cool!
I dunno enough about Morgans. Those sure do look hinky, though.
<< <i>in my opinion, 99-s is real but very worn......the 88-o is a contemporary counterfeit (may be silver but i guarantee it's underweight) >>
They are in fact silver. The 99, just looks mushed as someone put it. The 88 I still not convinced it's a fake based on the reverse, I do accept the acid idea as a possible explination, thanks.
As far as weight, I have a pile of coins here waiting for me to find out the weight on, I think it's finally time to get a scale.
The 88 does look fake.
S
<< <i>The '88 screams "fake" to me.
The '99 also looks fake, but I am less certain of it.
>>
Ditto here
Recipient of the coveted "You Suck" award, April 2009 for cherrypicking a 1833 CBHD LM-5, and April 2022 for a 1835 LM-12, and again in Aug 2012 for picking off a 1952 FS-902.
<< <i>Magnet works great to see if its pot metal >>
Pot metal which is mostly tin and lead is not magnetic.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars
<< <i>88-O looks like a crappy fake, 99-S just looks like a crappy coin. >>
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
K S
A cast fake would show casting marks between the reeding on the 88 where the molds cames together. There does appear to be reeding from the shots you've taken.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>The 1899-S is probably genuine and the 1888-O is probably a contemporary non-silver counterfeit.
Couldn't say for sure on either one without seeing them.
TD >>
I agree on the 1899-S, but wonder if the 1888-O may be a genuine coin that was once dipped in acid (though there is a strong probability that it is a contemporary fake.)
<< <i>
<< <i>in my opinion, 99-s is real but very worn......the 88-o is a contemporary counterfeit (may be silver but i guarantee it's underweight) >>
>>
"La Vostra Nonna Ha Faccia Del Fungo"
The second (1888 o) is a cast fake... The surfaces are rough & crude.
You may want to check the the specific gravity & weight of these two pieces to make a final determination.