| Author |
 Replies: 23 / Views: 4,984 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5833 Posts |
 Patrick, The first picture doesn't match the second picture, there's contact marks that on the first picture and clearly the second picture don't have those marks. Sorry, I don't see the over date on the second picture, more of a worn die for the date (year). As for the grade, I would say is a solid MS 63 in my opinion. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4541 Posts |
i am pretty sure that second picture is not a 42/1
|
|
New Member
 France, Metropolitan
9 Posts |
If you say that the second image is not 42/41, you say : there are one possibility for the first to be 42/41.It's the same money mister.I am not a liar.
|
|
New Member
France, Metropolitan
9 Posts |
Good morning,this is normal that differences appear on the first and two image.I am not a professional photographer.To obtain a good photo I am obliged to make several photos.For exemple: when I have the good image for hair, I have no more the date and the opposit.Thas according the lightings we can think that it not the send monay.Sorry.I send you one photo where you will can see all that I say: 42/41// shock on cheek and the hair without wears and onlyone money.Thank you very much.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
672 Posts |
Welcome! to CCF,
I dont know that much about merc dimes but I do speak a little french, so if you do have some translation issues I may be able to assist in that. Hope you find what you are looking for!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
672 Posts |
But I do agree that this coin is in solid MS60-63 range, but cant say on the overdate Ill defer to someone else on that. I think people are weary of the contact marks arround the date at the first picture and them being almost absent on the second.
Sorry for the Double Post
|
|
New Member
France, Metropolitan
9 Posts |
Bonsoir Americanamafia.Ma passion pour votre monnaie et mon admiration pour votre culture va bien au-delà d' une simple discussion sur une pièce de 10 centimes, et peu importe sa valeur.Ce qui ne m' empèche pas d' être fière de mes origines.On peut aimer plusieurs choses dans la vie.Je vous remercie infiniment pour votre aide, cela me touche beaucoup et si besoin est, je ferai appel à vous.J' ai envoye une autre photo qui est plus convaincante, je pense.Merci beaucoup.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4541 Posts |
Quote:
If you say that the second image is not 42/41, you say : there are one possibility for the first to be 42/41.It's the same money mister.I am not a liar. First off to the community Second I never said the top picture was a 42/1 dime. third I never said you were a liar. Take a chill pill. you wanted to show us pictures of your MS 42/1 dime and I looked at them and said I did not think the second one was a 42/1 dime. The first picture you posted looks more like a 42/1 Denver than a 42/1 Philadelphia minted coin. and the reverse of the coin has no d mintmark Here is a picture of a 42/1 dime Graded MS-63  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
564 Posts |
Davis I agree with you. The first picture is a 2 over 1 but the large 2nd picture is not. I am 100% sure they are not the same coin. If you enlarge the 2nd picture it does not show the 1 or the ding marks as pictured in the first one. Maybe the wrong picture was uploaded. I'm sure this response will upset the original author. This is my opinion and by posting on a forum that's what you are looking to get.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5833 Posts |
Patrick,
If you do believe that your 42/41 is authentic than you would want to submit it to PCGS or NGC for a proper grade and certification, as one in MS grade are in thousands of dollars, doing so would guaranteed it is real and for better sell down the road, but I agree with other here that the chance is nil.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
The two pictures are of the same coin. It is hard to see but there is the same nick in the field above and right of the 9 in both pictures.
Unfortunately the grade don't matter, it is not real.
If you look at the picture of the real one that daviscfad posted you will notice that the underneath 1 is slightly past the leftmost edge of the 2 and it has a prominent upper serif. The original post coins has the left edge of the 2 noticeably left of the left edge of the 1 and there is no upper serif.
Edited by Conder101
08/23/2010 09:15 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8904 Posts |
It appears to me that the first coin posted is a 1942 over 1 Denver mint Mercury dime. The Philadelphia mint has a much more pronounced offset 1 versus 2 than the Denver overdate of the same year, according to this guide: http://grading-guide.com/variety_mercury.htmlOf course that doesn't account for the lack of D mint mark on the reverse.  Or that I don't see much of the same overdate in the second picture... Edited by Moe145
08/23/2010 11:21 am
|
|
Valued Member
United States
314 Posts |
First picture carries some of the characteristics of the 42/41, but the date appears way to flat for me. Thus it loses some of the definition of an original 42/41. The 1 is much to flat behind the 2 which also appears way to flat. It looks like a possible counterfeit IMO. Are the chinese selling their stuff in France now too? AS for the second coin, a nice coin, but I'm going to say AU58. There appears to be wear on the uppermost horizontal band across the fasces along with some wear on the obverse above the ear. It does not appear to be overdate and definitely not the same coin as in the other picture of the date only obverse.
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
The coin looks like a fake, or an altered date attempt to me. I may be wrong though.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2540 Posts |
not the overdate, for a Philly coin.
period.
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 23 / Views: 4,984 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 08/22/2010 12:07 pm
