| Author |
 Replies: 54 / Views: 11,144 |
|
|
|
|
Valued Member
 Canada
270 Posts |
I consider anything that has come from a prooflike (flatpack/cello) mint set, or anything that is NOT a business strike to be PL or NC. A prooflike over here has brilliant devices over a brilliant field (mirror), just like the one you are seeing. If it were a business strike, the finishes of the devices & fields would be the same, but have a much more muted brilliance...
As for the 42/1...i dont see it being a fake slab for many reasons...
1. If someone could exactly replicate the PCGS slab, then the market would be flooded with high-quality fake slabs, which I only see junk that I can break with my hands...
2. PCGS has a registry, and for a counterfeiter to access this, and add his/her coin to the registry, they would need to be conspiring directly with PCGS, and that is nearly impossible.
3. If this piece were truly faked, IMO it would be in much better condition than F15.
Although I do agree that this slab is as questionable as a 3 - dollar bill....is there really much I can do about it?.
..at least the 1795 h/d was legitimate out of the group! ;)
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1781 Posts |
UncleLuc,
When switching to a totally different subject, it is always best to create a new thread. The question on modern Canadian coins is totally unrelated to US Classic Variety and Error Coins. It tends of confuse readers when two topics are being discussed in the same thread. I'm guilty of this too. However, your question on the Canadian belongs in the Canadian forum or maybe under grading since the designations PL or MS are part of grading.
Edited by koinpro
05/16/2015 11:32 am
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Quote:
. If someone could exactly replicate the PCGS slab, then the market would be flooded with high-quality fake slabs, which I only see junk that I can break with my hands... There have been fake PCGS slabs on the market since 2008 and they are getting better all the time and they are becoming ever more common. Typically they have fake coins in the slab, but there would no reason they couldn't put a real MDD dime in a holder (They are common enough) and label it 42/1-D. Quote:
2. PCGS has a registry, and for a counterfeiter to access this, and add his/her coin to the registry, they would need to be conspiring directly with PCGS, and that is nearly impossible. All it takes to add a coin to your registry set is to enter a PCGS serial number. As long as it a valid number and isn't already in someone else's registry set it will be accepted. Finding valid numbers is no problem. There is no need for a conspiracy. And as far as I know this piece isn't in a Registry set. Quote:
3. If this piece were truly faked, IMO it would be in much better condition than F15. Why? if you have a genuine 1942 dime with MDD in Fine and you were going to put it into a fake slab what grade would you put on the slab? put a higher grade on the slab and it will get outed instantly. If you want a higher grade o the slab you need a higher grade dime. But why give up the hundreds of dollars the Fine will net you? It's better than the $1 the raw dime would get you. |
|
Moderator
 United States
56855 Posts |
The 1990 MS dime: I don't know Canadian mining practices very well but here in the states your coin would be considered a "brilliant proof" if it was a proof. I think it is a BU strike because a proof would have "sharp" edges on the lettering and the rim, I would think...no pro here though. John1  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
20753 Posts |
It has already been stated that all these TPGS's are made up of people. Not some machine or computer but people. These people are hired for a job just like a department store and not all are really experts or may not even be close to an expert. I'm not sure how they use or even try to use a Quality checking system but possibly may not even have one. Regardless, the coin in mention is absolutely not a 42/41 so it should be sent back to them for re-evaluating. No big thing, we all make mistakes.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
270 Posts |
So an update on this piece... I put the coin under a microscope, and also brought the piece in to be examined by another professional, and in fact this IS, a 42/1 overdate The coin is of illustration #2 in Red Book, but the reason it can't be detected, is that the bottom know of the 2 has been worn down, as well as covered by that blueish buildup on the coin. This piece is in fact, a 1942/1 overdate. If I could post microscope pictures I would but unfortunately not able. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
20753 Posts |
Could be but I still doubt it. If it really is, nice going. But I wouldn't put it in my Album.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8516 Posts |
Oregon coin geek.....*** GO BEAVS ! ! ! ***
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
270 Posts |
Look in the RedBook guys... illustration #2. |
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Why limit yourself to a single small pic in the Red Book when there are dozens of high-resolution images available all over the Internet? And every_single_one of them disagrees with you. We're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one. It isn't the overdate, and your own images prove that fact. I note you haven't allowed these closeup images into your ebay auction for the coin. Somebody's going to be disappointed. Fortunately, you're asking $100 over market so with luck nobody will bite. |
|
Valued Member
Canada
270 Posts |
I took the coin down, just because it seems as tho I am being "whitch hunted" over it, and I find that really frustrating. The fact that I am being basic accused of being purposely misleading with pictures on my ebay ads is a darn joke!! I am trying to build a really honest ebay profile, and for you to make comments like that, especially being a moderator....(holds tongue).... I replied to the topic saying that under a MICROSCOPE, the piece clearly has a 1 under the 2, AS WELL AS Machine Doubling! The coin is in a PCGS holder, certified by 2 or maybe even 3 different graders. Why would I ever assume it was NOT the overdate? I would never, EVER purposely deceive my buyers!! As I said, the measly profit attached to this piece is in no way worth arguing over, or being accused of lying to, or cheating my customers. My main point, the coin is CERTIFIED. Being a moderator, I ask that you lock or remove this thread, as it has become unproductive, and I received 50+ responses that could have been used actually helping other members. Thanks. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
20753 Posts |
Quote:Look in the RedBook guys... illustration #2. I did and still not even close. Regardless of is or isn't, still an interesting coin. |
|
New Member
United States
1 Posts |
Hello. I'm new to this community. I would appreciate your help please. I purchased 213 Mercury dimes from gentleman who used to own gas station and held onto lot of old change. I hve several 1942 Mercury's. Please take. Look at few nd let me know what you think. Thanks in advance.  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
Just machine damage on the date. Even the 9 is showing it. Here is the location of the mint mark on the 1942/1-D dime:  The location is different. But even if the mint mark location was the same, it wouldn't prove it to be the 1942/1-D dime. It is the hub doubling that proves that it is that die.  This is a side by side of the two dates and mint marks. This helps us see that they are not form the same dies. The clincher? The shortness of the '4' bottom part. That tells me that it is not the 1942/1-D DDO. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8516 Posts |
I wonder if he ever sold it ?
Oregon coin geek.....*** GO BEAVS ! ! ! ***
|
|
|
Replies: 54 / Views: 11,144 |
|
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 05/16/2015 11:29 am
