Home› U.S. Coin Forum

Is this 1893-S Morgan real, or not so much?

braddickbraddick Posts: 25,000 ✭✭✭✭✭
in U.S. Coin Forum
image

image

peacockcoins

Comments

  • ChrisRxChrisRx Posts: 5,619 ✭✭✭✭
    Really polished!
    image
  • RampageRampage Posts: 9,548 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Pat-

    Can you provide a close-up of LIBERTY?
  • braddickbraddick Posts: 25,000 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Pat-

    Can you provide a close-up of LIBERTY? >>



    Unfortunately, no. (PM sent as to why.)

    peacockcoins

  • AUandAGAUandAG Posts: 24,992 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Fake. Stars a really mushy, S mintmark is too clear. Usually in this grade the stars are still ok and the mintmark is
    mushy. Can't see the diagnostic in the T of Liberty either, but a loop could determine if it's there. Definately one
    that should have already been authenticated by someone.

    bobimage
    Registry: CC lowballs (boblindstrom), bobinvegas1989@yahoo.com
  • adamlaneusadamlaneus Posts: 6,969 ✭✭✭
    It looks very mushy to me. Almost every letter looks crude, with what look like inconsistencies in the serifs. The first U in Unum is missing serifs, the serifs on the N next to it do not look good either and the dentils are sloppy around this area too.

    It was polished for what looks like eight straight hours. I suppose that could have moved metal around and could explain my complaints about this item.

    No sir, I don't like it.

    I'd love to be proven wrong. Those are the more interesting threads where everyone goes one way and then the expert shows the definitive answer as to why we are wrong.


  • GoldenEyeNumismaticsGoldenEyeNumismatics Posts: 13,187 ✭✭✭
    I have sorta a gut feeling it's not real.
  • DUIGUYDUIGUY Posts: 7,252 ✭✭✭
    ear wax out of place, IMHO image
    “A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly."



    - Marcus Tullius Cicero, 106-43 BC
  • braddickbraddick Posts: 25,000 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I too think it's fake. I've had it for awhile and may send it in with PCGS authenticated service but at $100. a pop and it very likely to come back as a fake, I've been putting it off.

    The other thread (Gob. $) got me thinking about this one again.

    peacockcoins

  • dcarrdcarr Posts: 9,495 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The "3" doesn't look right. Altered date.
    Moonlight Mint
  • …… Posts: 958 ✭✭✭
    s isnt small enough.
  • messydeskmessydesk Posts: 20,461 ✭✭✭✭✭
    NFG.

    Mintmark not tilted.
    Obverse VG, reverse EF.
    Date too low (but in correct lateral position).
    Ugly a$$ piece of crap.
    John
    Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
  • AUandAGAUandAG Posts: 24,992 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>NFG.

    Mintmark not tilted.
    Obverse VG, reverse EF.
    Date too low (but in correct lateral position).
    Ugly a$$ piece of crap. >>



    BRAVO, well spoken!

    bobimage
    Registry: CC lowballs (boblindstrom), bobinvegas1989@yahoo.com
  • dan383dan383 Posts: 812
    I'm with the NFG crowd............

    For a C note run it by the MMFIC , then you will know for sure...............





    Dan
    Fishing is not a matter of life and death.......It's much more important than that........
  • lcoopielcoopie Posts: 8,874 ✭✭✭✭✭
    p341 PCGS guide

    the one is not centered on the dentil
    and the date doesn't seem to slant up to the right
    LCoopie = Les
  • lasvegasteddylasvegasteddy Posts: 10,447 ✭✭✭
    no need to add to this mix...you've got a enough pass lines here
    everything in life is but merely on loan to us by our appreciation....lose your appreciation and see


  • messydeskmessydesk Posts: 20,461 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>For a C note run it by the MMFIC , then you will know for sure............... >>


    Nah, just PayPal me an L note and you'll still know for sure. image
    John
    Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
  • rjsrivrjsriv Posts: 256
    The 3 is not right--FAKEAROO
  • UtahCoinUtahCoin Posts: 5,366 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Fake! Date position is all wrong.
    I used to be somebody, now I'm just a coin collector.
    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.
  • julie43julie43 Posts: 261


    << <i>The "3" doesn't look right. Altered date. >>

    I totally agree with that, it is the only thing that looks amiss
  • nicetoning42107nicetoning42107 Posts: 1,162
    Actually without looking at all the specific details the big screamer to me here - the lack of detail on the obverse. The reverse looks practically uncirculated because all the detail is there. The obverse looks VF. Must be a cast counterfeit since it has that mushy look on the obverse like that.
    A lie told often enough becomes the truth. ~Vladimir Lenin
  • tightbudgettightbudget Posts: 7,299 ✭✭✭
    Not real
  • coolestcoolest Posts: 2,281 ✭✭✭
    Can you get an accurate weight?

    And the 3 does look funny. I don't know Morgans but I have never seen a 3 like that on any other coins.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Format
SpoilerCodeQuote
Heading 2Heading 1
Emoji
:):D:(;):/:o:s:p:'(:|B):#:*<3o:)>:)
Url
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file
Home • U.S. Coin ForumComment As ...