Need help evaluating this 1893-CC Morgan Dollar

halfcentman · January 9, 2012 11:40PM

Simple question:

This coin was (obviously) wiped, but it has XF details as these coinst tend to come weak (or at least I think it does).

I am selling this coin to a good dealer friend who does a lot of favors for me.

What's a fair price for both parties? I have been doing lousy with dollars as of late on eBay, and I am primarily an early copper person.

Thanks for your help,

Greg

-------------

commoncents05 · January 9, 2012 11:45PM

The CC looks all wrong to me, I think it might be counterfeit. Looks too tall in the photos.

-Paul

halfcentman · January 9, 2012 11:48PM

<< The CC looks all wrong to me, I think it might be counterfeit. Looks too tall in the photos.

-Paul >>

I tilted the coin to show the lines, hence it is a trifle oblong.

blu62vette · January 9, 2012 11:50PM

<< 

<< The CC looks all wrong to me, I think it might be counterfeit. Looks too tall in the photos.

-Paul >>

I tilted the coin to show the lines, hence it is a trifle oblong. >>

Even with that the CC looks very odd.

commoncents05 · January 9, 2012 11:52PM

I will defer to you since you have the coin in hand, Greg. Make sure to compare the mint mark under magnification to a close up of a known genuine.

-Paul

MilkmanDan · January 9, 2012 11:53PM

I agree, that CC doesn't look quite right. Here's another 93-CC reverse for comparison.

Edit: Whoops, common cents beat me out with his pic. Oh well.

guitarwes · January 9, 2012 11:56PM

<< 

<< The CC looks all wrong to me, I think it might be counterfeit. Looks too tall in the photos.

-Paul >>

I tilted the coin to show the lines, hence it is a trifle oblong. >>

It ain't tilted THAT much. I'm concerned that it's not authentic.

halfcentman · January 10, 2012 12:01AM

<< 

<< 

<< The CC looks all wrong to me, I think it might be counterfeit. Looks too tall in the photos.

Here is a close-up of the mint mark:

For argument's sake, can we assume it is for now and humor me?
If it's not genuine, it's not getting sold.

blu62vette · January 10, 2012 12:03AM

<< 

<< 

<< The CC looks all wrong to me, I think it might be counterfeit. Looks too tall in the photos.

-Paul >>

I tilted the coin to show the lines, hence it is a trifle oblong. >>

It ain't tilted THAT much. I'm concerned that it's not authentic. >>

The olive branch leaves look off also. Should have more detail for the grade.

mustanggt · January 10, 2012 12:55AM

Agree, the coin sure doesn't look right.

al410 · January 10, 2012 1:10AM

After looking at the additional photos it looks fine to me, I would price it at recent VF35 prices to allow it to be graded at PCGS, probably come back as genuine for cleaning. I would not think anyone would pay 40 or 45 money without being slabbed as such because of cleaning.

AL

DennisH · January 10, 2012 1:12AM

I wouldn't touch that coin. I also suspect it is a counterfeit.

al410 · January 10, 2012 1:16AM

Well in hand it would be easier to tell about being counterfeit but with these pictures please tell me what your seeing as I am always trying to learn, after the additional photos I just don't see a problem with the mint mark?
Thanks
AL

Windycity · January 10, 2012 1:30AM

Date looks like a far date and doesn't match with the CC mintmark on the only know far date VAM. Could be counterfeit.

AUandAG · January 10, 2012 1:34AM

CC dollars do not tend to come weak. Rather the opposite as so few were made the dies
stood up quite well.
The coin you pictured is a fake.

bob

coinhunters · January 10, 2012 1:40AM

There is more than a couple of areas on this coin which indicate it is a counterfeit. I'd discuss the authenticity concern with your potential buyer.

Ibnemo · January 10, 2012 1:41AM

LanceNewmanOCC · January 10, 2012 1:41AM

.
as the images are too small for professional attribution, i'd still lay money on the table that coin is not authentic
.
only spot on that coin you need to look at is the CC
.

al410 · January 10, 2012 1:45AM

" The striking of 1893-CC dollars varies. The typical piece is apt to have some flatness at the obverse center and, on the reverse, weak breast feathers on the eagle. Sharply struck coins do exist and are in the distinct minority. Once again, cherrypicking is the order of the day for the discriminating buyer. Leave the weak coins to unknowing, uncaring investors"

Source> http://www.usrarecoininvestments.com/collecting/Silver Dollars/1893-cc_morgan_dollar.htm

I am not saying this is not a fake, just trying to learn how others are so confident that it is a fake from the pictures provided so I do not make a mistake in the future.

AL

Ibnemo · January 10, 2012 1:54AM

OK, Lets try this again. I think you answered you own question. Obviously wiped, XF details, Selling to a dealer friend you feel you owe return favors.
Let your friend give you a price over spot and take it. He will be happy and you will feel good.
I do not see PCGS grading this coin past original. IMHO.

NewParadigm · January 10, 2012 1:55AM

At the very least, it is cleaned.

AUandAG · January 10, 2012 2:05AM

What does it weigh?
What is the diameter and thickness?

There are no separations in the leaves on the reverse olive branches.
Very far date with that CC placement does not jive.
Much too weakly struck at the centers. Many were weakly struck (revise my previous statement)
but not that weak.
3 in date is off, not correct shape.

bob

DoubleEagle59 · January 10, 2012 2:10AM

Close-up pic shows a 'pebbly' looking surface to me.

Add this to the 'suspect' mintmark and I say it's most likely a Fake coin.

al410 · January 10, 2012 2:10AM

Thanks Bob, that was what I was looking for was an explanation of why people thought it was fake, of course having the coin to measure and weigh would make it much easier.
AL

halfcentman · January 10, 2012 5:20AM

<< Thanks Bob, that was what I was looking for was an explanation of why people thought it was fake, of course having the coin to measure and weigh would make it much easier.
AL >>

I am 99% sure the coin is fake. Thanks for your help in confirming this.

roadrunner · January 10, 2012 7:49AM

The patina on that coin looks very much like a coin that had been around for many decades.

An unusual look for a newer counterfeit.

MilkmanDan · January 10, 2012 8:12AM

<< The patina on that coin looks very much like a coin that had been around for many decades.

An unusual look for a newer counterfeit. >>

I would have thought the same until I started seeing copy coins showing up with "old looking" patina. Here's a good example (and in fact the CC on this copy coin looks like the one in the OP):

ebay link

Need help evaluating this 1893-CC Morgan Dollar

Comments

Leave a Comment