| Author |
Replies: 26 / Views: 7,607 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4883 Posts |
There're two things about it visually that are suspicious. First, the "6" in the date looks to be sitting a bit high. More concerning is how much lower in grade the reverse appears to be than the obverse. That can be an indicator of a counterfeit.
The weight being where it ought to be suggests it's genuine, but Chinese fakes can nowadays be ordered up in the correct composition. But at $24, it seems to be the worst that might've happened here was that you bought a little silver at 2X spot.
Colligo ergo sum
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1215 Posts |
Quote: The weight being where it ought to be suggests it's genuine, I agree that the weight can generally be able to determine real from fake, but sometimes, the counterfeiters may compensate for the loss of weight by increasing the coin's thickness. I do have such a coin. Weighs 26.7g but it's about 30% thicker than normal.The difference, while slight, makes all the difference. In regards to the OP, try comparing the thickness of your morgan with that of a confirmed genuine sample.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
567 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
62 Posts |
From what I can find, the dimensions of a real Morgan are 38.1mm or 1.5 inches diameter. My coin measures out 1.491 inches or 37.90mm, the thickness should be 2.4 mm or .09449 inches. My coin is 2.59mm or 0.102 inches. BTW I reload my own ammo so I have and use a set of digital calipers. I checked them against two other morgans I have one bought from a dealer in good standing here on this site, the other from a coin dealer. They measure as follows. 1896O Diameter is 37.8mm 1.49 inch Thickness comes in at .107 inch 2.72mm 1921 comes in at 38mm diameter 1.496 inch thickness is .113 inch or 2.87 mm
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
So, tell me. Where does one measure the thickness of a Morgan? And what thickness dimension is appropriate, and what is the tolerance for error? I don't know much about Morgans, and thickness as a viable authentication test is new to me.
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
62 Posts |
I put the calipers at the edge of the coin and ran it around the outside. Diameter I put it in the calipers putting one edge up to the caliper rail and the other two in the jaws. You can go a tenth of a mm back and forth very easy. I also do not over tighten or too lose I make it so the caliper will just hold the coin without slipping. But I admit I just started to measure coins.
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
10625 Posts |
I remember a thread a while back where the OP's Morgan had the correct weight and outside diameter but the thickness was over I'm guessing to compensate for the use of a less dense material. I'm pretty sure it was one of those crude castings though.(but not positive)
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
62 Posts |
None of my postings has ever had diameter or thickness measurements given.
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
10625 Posts |
Sorry, I was not referring to you @edteach. I'm not sure who posted the Morgan I'm thinking of but it was a year or so back.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12437 Posts |
Thickness of a struck coin is not a standard measurement because the thickness of the rim is a function of striking pressure(strong strike= thicker rim than a weak strike). Obviously, if the thickness varies by several millimeters then that would be an indicator of an excessively thick base metal fake but a variation of a few tenths of a millimeter is negligible. Thickness is a standard measurement used for unstruck planchets since the thickness of a blank is uniform.
Edited by biokemist6 12/16/2014 12:36 am
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
62 Posts |
I stopped by a local coin shop that is well respected, Westchester gold and diamond in Port Charlotte. I told them I wanted a morgan that was a good real example that has no chance of being a fake. I bought an 1885 O for 35 dollars in VF condition. It weighs 26.7g and is the same diameter and within a couple of .00mm of 2.4 as my others are. I used to collect old German medals and Soviet medals from WW2. My grandfather started me off with some of his bring backs. I quit for two reasons, one is people who are not historical minded think your trying to revive the third Reich ad the second is that it was getting hard to judge the fakes from the real medals. On one forum we had a guy go so far as to send in paint samples from what was thought to be real medals to get them spectral analized and Electron scanned. I had bought a Knights cross of the iron cross for 5500, made by 4 or Steinhur and luck and the collecting community was down to if the die cracks are like this its pre war, if its like this its post war. [the dies survived the war] I sold it before the thinking changed and my medal went from 5500 to 25 dollars. I am getting that feeling from Morgan and Peace dollars. I was even told today by Westchester that they don't buy panda silver. its too risky. I buy from JM Bullion, they don't even buy back silver and gold, and they get it from the mint. I hope I am not getting back into a crazy situation where every thing is suspect. Darn Chinese.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1388 Posts |
Quote: I don't know much about Morgans  The coin looks okay. I also like your countertops.
|
|
Valued Member
167 Posts |
Quote: I bought an 1885 O for 35 dollars in VF condition. 
|
|
New Member
United States
16 Posts |
When measuring Morgans or coins in general do you measure the rim or inside the rim for thickness when using calipers?
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
10625 Posts |
At the rim. You can actually just hold a coin in question next to a confirmed authentic example and see the difference.
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 26 / Views: 7,607 |
Page 2 of 2
|