| Author |
Replies: 28 / Views: 2,955 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12477 Posts |
I don't thing it's a proof, but I also don't think it's fake. Something has happened to the surfaces of this coin that is creating the odd appearance. The step weakness on the reverse would indicate a business strike and the FG seems to be thin on normal coins of this type, so something that has eaten at the surface would just exaggerate that as well as thinning details like the date. You can still see some of the master die doubling on the lower curl of the 6. Maybe corroded, naturally or artificially, then whizzed?
In Memory of Crazyb0 12-26-1951 to 7-27-2020 In Memory of Tootallious 3-31-1964 to 4-15-2020 In Memory of T-BOP 10-12-1949 to 1-19-2024
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
Die polishing altered the coins devices. Removing the fields in an extreme fashion, makes the devices shorter. There must have been some sever clashing on this die. It is a real coin.
Edited by coop 05/26/2021 08:27 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3281 Posts |
Whatever it is, I think we can agree it's quite the coin for discussion.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
4618 Posts |
Wow! Could this have been a rusted die? The pitting seems too widely spaced for this to be struck with a sandcast die. I really have no idea either way! If you get a definitive answer, please let us know. 
ANA ID: 3203813 - CONECA ID: N-5637 Clean a coin that may be worth collecting? Please DON'T! When in doubt, leave it dirty!! 
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
The head has the chiseled look of a 1909-1915 era wheat. Never seen anything like it.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3237 Posts |
To quote Sandy Koufax, "the question is 'why.'"
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
But note the engraving on the '6' that is on all the small dates:  You can see it, with the belly button lint on top of it.
|
|
Valued Member
206 Posts |
My guess is someone tried to turn a large date into a small date for what ever reason. probably tooled the coin itself, or made fake dies from a large date and made it look like a small date
Edited by JohnH4444 05/26/2021 10:37 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2156 Posts |
Very interesting coin. I would've come to the "fake" conclusion as well. Quite a cool example though.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5240 Posts |
TB, I can dang sure see why you would question this cents authenticity.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
Keep in mind they didn't create new masters each year. The master hub was used several years. So the earlier coin has the smaller head on the die, as it was still fresh many years. Some of the master hubs had some alterations on them. Thus some year/s had the same issue over a long period of time. So in the 1960's the hub was swelling wider. Making the devices large and the bust a lot larger. So when a very hub polishing took place it, with the fields reduced, the devices would appear smaller and the bust would be weaker. That is what I feel we are seeing on both sides of this coin. Very heavy polishing reduced the normal sizes of the devices. In 1969 they replaced the aged master hub. Since the mid 1980's they create new masters every year.  
Edited by coop 05/26/2021 8:56 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
6116 Posts |
Thanks for all the great responses! This one is odd and it doesn't seem that there is a consensus yet. I haven't decided where I fall yet, as it really seems like a fake but can't put all the pieces together to figure out the how and why. Coop is in the abraded die camp, but it just seems like what looks abraded looks very, very abraded while other parts of the coin as super tall and crisp. So here are two more images. The first is the date with the little bit of crud removed where the master doubling would be under the tip of the 6 on a small date. I just don't see it in hand at all. Of note, however, when I first saw the coin I thought it was a small date based on the overall look of the date. The second image merely shows what some of the letters look like using a transverse view. Very tall and insanely sharp lines and corners. I realize that would be deep in the die, but usually abraded dies just don't look this crisp. And a question. I think I see subtle differences in the hair outline. Something like that might occur between a proof and a business strike. What would a coin look like that was a proof strike on a business strike planchet? The edges of the coin are definitely beveled and it's a business strike planchet not a proof planchet. Thanks again for all the comments! I still wonder what this one is.  
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2156 Posts |
So weird. The crispness of the T doesn't look like abrasion to me, leading me to believe it's counterfeit. However, I can see why abrasion would cause such an appearance. This is a toughie, but I think I'll have to fall in the counterfeit side of the debate. Honestly, it could be either though. I'm curious to see what else others say about it.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
Well back to the die polishing. Why would that area be polished. They only work on the areas where a clash happened. That area is not a target area for clash marks on the first 'T', so it would probably not be affected. With the obstruction removed, it maybe just a large date. (Something I hadn't consider yet) But with the weight is normal, then my next question would be? Why would anyone make a counterfeit of a coin that no one would want. Counterfeiters are into this to make something desirable. Nothing desirable copied for this coin? The small date plains are not that expensive to make a fake example for.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5887 Posts |
That looks fake to me. Date is so far off I can't see it being mere polishing that brought it to this point. LIBERTY also looks very wrong to me. IMO this is a counterfeit. I just can't see die polishing altering the devices this drastically that the whole obverse looks off. Of course, this is just my opinion so if anyone can prove my wrong go right ahead.  Very cool coin bats, and whatever it is it's making for quite the topic of discussion. -CH27
Collector of U.S. Coins, Varieties, and Colonial Coinage
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 28 / Views: 2,955 |
Page 2 of 2
|