| Author |
 Replies: 29 / Views: 5,992 |
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
17900 Posts |
 with fake. Placement of date and mint mark don't coincide with known dies. |
|
Pillar of the Community
7234 Posts |
Quote:
He sent it in to a TPGS and it came back graded. He resent it to another place and it came back as a fake If it came back graded, what sense does it make sending it back out?  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
20753 Posts |
Quote:
If it came back graded, what sense does it make sending it back out? He was just to certain something was wrong with this one. He figured it may well be worth the cost. Now he is sorry he did that. There are just so many fakes out there on this coin and some are really fantastically good. Whoever is making them spends a lot of time and money trying to make them look authentic. |
|
Pillar of the Community
7234 Posts |
Quote:
He figured it may well be worth the cost. Now he is sorry he did that. That's too bad. Oh well, at least he didn't sell a counterfeit. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2207 Posts |
The designer's initials--AW--look very clumsy.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
The images aren't perfectly clear, but the shape of the inside of the mint mark, and its' location, stand out to me. We should be able to see the decided triangular shape of the inside in these images, while the one shown here seems curved.
Further, of the four known MM locations, only one is this distant from the leaves. On this coin, I can't even see the third leaf hanging which ought to be the arbiter of MM location; is it even there? That leaf should be plainly visible down to the lowest-possible grade.
Either way, I expect the top of the mint mark when extended left to draw a line into the space between the two upper bars of the E, and this MM seems low for that.
|
|
Moderator
United States
188770 Posts |
I have enjoyed reading the analysis.  This is one hole I need to fill and would like to know it will be filled with a proper example.  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
20753 Posts |
Quote:
Placement of date and mint mark don't coincide with known dies. I thought all Mint Marks were placed on those coins by hand. If this is true, how could there be a constant location and even a specific tilt to a Mint Mark? What has a die have to do with those Mint Mark locations. |
|
Rest in Peace
10197 Posts |
Carl, Mintmarks were placed by hand on the working dies of which four seem known as used
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
20753 Posts |
Quote:
Carl, Mintmarks were placed by hand on the working dies of which four seem known as used And that is the word, known. Could be more. Just not great records of things back then. |
|
Moderator
United States
188770 Posts |
Do you really doubt that they could keep accurate records in 1916? |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4416 Posts |
I blew up the original pic, and the "D" mintmark appears to be lacking the telltale diamond within.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7375 Posts |
Yep, inside of mm looks oval in lieu of diamond/triangle shaped. If I send out a coin and it comes back genuine, I'm stopping there. If I didn't trust the TPG I sent it to, then why send it at all.  Edited by edweather
10/17/2017 12:34 pm
|
| |
Replies: 29 / Views: 5,992 |
First Page
Posted 10/11/2017 7:48 pm
