Is This A Real 1795 Silver Dollar?

I'm not an early dollar guru, but personally, I think the coin is not authentic. Lettering looks off with "notching" at the bottom of many of the letters in LIBERTY and several in UNITED STATES OF AMERICA that's not present on the authentic example.

ET

The "notching" at the base of the letters is the result of striking. It is known as bifurcation as is the result of the outward movement of the metal filling the far ends of the uprights of the letters first and then working back toward the base. If the force of the strike ends before the upright fills completely you get that "dimple" at the base of the upright. It is fairly common on early coins but can sometimes even be seen on coins struck today.

The notching IS present on genuine examples. Some others have already explained why and how. If anything- the presence of notching adds to the authenticity.

It's my understanding, according to folks who went through it, is that they pay for the mistake. It's a lengthy process and there is more assurance for ANA members. On another forum, one guy became an ANA member specifically because of a PCGS mistake. PCGS mislabeled a circulated proof Seated dollar as a business strike. PCGS reholdered the coin as a proof and sent him a check for the difference in value.

When you see the same coin with the same contact marks in multiple holders from different TPG's you can say that coins of that date and mint with those contact marks is a counterfeit. In the case of the 1798 S-158 large cent they had had to "work" on the die because there were problems with the Y in Liberty on the coin they used to create the die. When they reworked the Y they changed it into a form that was never used on the Draped bust cents and copper specialists spotted it. Recently an 1872-S half dollar showed up that specialists condemned as fake. It had a reverse die that wasn't used until 1875. It used an obverse die In an early die stage, that was used in Philadelphia in 1872 and the reverse was a late die stage that was used in San Francisco in 1875. At least a half dozen of these have been seen from both PCGS and NGC.

The NGC article makes it sound like they identified them. They didn't. The counterfeits were pointed out to them by specialists after they were already slabbed as genuine.

I should like to add something:

1. Counterfeits of this coin were not this good a decade ago. Therefore, if this coin was put into the collection prior to the 1990's it is as genuine as it looks.

2. I vomit when a poster writes "FAKE" with out giving a reason for that conclusion. No true numismatist is interested in a lame opinion that is not backed up with a reason that we can all discuss and possibly learn from. The "notching" post and the correct answer by Conder101 is an example of an informative exchange we all can learn from.

3. putting "lay lines" on an image of a genuine coin and a coin that is suspect will not be of any use t detect a "deceptive" counterfeit because they will match!

4. The post about very deceptive counterfeit dollars is true. It happened a couple of years
ago The diagnostics of the fakes were published and the TPGS covered their error. That is why I posted that a coin in an old collection that looks this good is genuine!

Hello Everyone I am sorry for the late reply, I was just waiting for the coin to come back in .

PCGS was taking their time Probably because of the holidays.

I had spent 160$ to get this coin graded, I feel as if though I paid too much?
it was sent through an authorized Dealer. 5 business days Service almost became almost 3 weeks.
The Company was very nice to me & I Still think it was worth the 160 to get this Precious Coin graded.
*
*
*
*
*

Nice Guesses To the people who said around VF
*
*
*
*
I want to Thank everyone for all the help again, and Here it is.


1795 Flowing Hair Two Leaves Hidden Star Variety
B4-BB-14