1854 Oseated Liberty Half With Arrows Your Opinions.please

As I've suggested twice already - check the edge for a seam or sanding of that edge.

You are welcome, even though it's not good news. The only way I learned about cast fakes was by being burned myself, also with a Seated half.

If you check the details, especially of the reverse, you will see that everything looks 'bigger' and more 'filled in'.

There are a couple of folks on this forum that COLLECT fake coins for informational purposes that might be interested in this coin which would be good for everyone.

Telecom - I'm blowing the pictures up huge.

Please educate me, if you think this is real, how:

The dentices, especially at 7:00, are doubled and slant both down and sideways. That can't be die shift.

Every letter in the legend is larger than is normal for this date and mint mark. So bad, in fact, that the bases of the letters touch throughout and at UNI on the left and IF A on the right exhibit bottom bleed from all of those letters,

There is nothing sharp. This isn't from a light or inconsistent strike because everything is FAT. Much thicker than a normal reverse of this year.

The bottom of the shield is a filled in mess.

The value of a coin does not always indicate the likelihood of it being fake. Contemporary counterfeits cared nothing about numismatic value.

I would appreciate any education you can provide that helps me understand why all of this doesn't indicate a cast copy.

Okay moxking.

Denticles:
- Obverse @ 7:00: slight obverse misangled die (MAD)
- Reverse @ 7:00-9:00: die cracks and breaks going up through UNITED

Letters: the die cracks and breaks are a likely contributor to the fattening and the squished-together look. Also, the die cracks are indicative of a late die state, meaning that the die struck very many coins so that the metal flow into the incuse areas of the die wore away at the crisp edges of all the devices. I'm seeing this especially in AMERICA.

Shield: that area is a very common area for a die clash with the area in front of Liberty's belly. Look at various certified EF/AU seated halved from the mid to late 1850's and you'll find that 1 in 3 of them will have a bulge in the lower part of the shield, also indicative of a late die state.

As for contemporary counterfeits, I do not believe that this coin is one as contemporary counterfeit Seated halves are very rare, and this coin shows devices that are far too sharp and uniform for your typical contemporary cointerfeits. A simple weight test will answer all questions to this as contemporary counterfeits are NEVER the right weight as they use a base metal to replace the precious metal content of the coin they are forging. If it weighs right, then it is genuine.

I hope these answer your questions.

Oh, and you can trust me as I took the Detection of Counterfeit and Altered Coins class at the ANA Summer Seminar. I did very in the class, just so you know.

Yes there are cast counterfeits of Seated halves out there, but they never exhibit luster, unlike this coin. You could say that it may be a 1-to-1 die transfer, but the minute details would be missing (note the sharpness of the hair and some of the feathers on the reverse) and the relief would be much lower. I've seen enough Seated halves while I was looking for a nice one for my type set to know what the releif should look like, and it looks right on this coin.

A lack of relief does not constitute a flattening of the high points of the devices; on the contrary, the low points on the devices would be flattened, contributing to a phenomenon called the "lake effect" where there are flat spaces in the middle of the devices where there wouldn't normally be (ie hair, dress folds, feathers, etc.). The only this that would cause a flattening of the devices would be a poor strike or wear.

1854-O 50c has a known fake struck in a brass alloy.

Another thing that causes reverse like that is tooling and chasing, where the metal ends up on the edges of the coin and devices. The feather lines under the shield are impossibly detailed for the coin, even compared to the finest known (MS-67) example.

Someone should link this thread to LSCC and see if someone wants to take a shot at it or use it for material for a Gobrecht article.

Could this be the explanation for the fatty appearance of the letters on the reverse?