1916-D Real Or Fake?

Welcome to Coin Community, sonicty28.

Quite frankly, I would not touch a raw 1916-D unless it was coming from a dealer of wide reputation with that specific issue - there are too many fakes on the market, and the coin is too valuable.

There are 4 known mint mark locations for 1916-D. This one *could* be what's referred to as location #4, but I think it's a bit low. Added to which, there's enough missing detail in and amongst the leaves to make me think it's a cast fake.

Keep in mind, in this condition even an example which has been cleaned - this one shows obvious brush marks - it's still a $5000 coin. I, for one, would not risk $5000 on an unauthenticated coin.

Thanks for the quick response, I wouldn't be paying that much as the guy doesn't know too much about the coins he inherited but I obviously don't want to get duped either. Here is another picture.

Do you think you could get a closeup of the date, and a clearer photo of the front of the coin (what we call the obverse) would be helpful.

I've circled the areas where I believe the detail to show the mushiness of a cast fake:






That is a morally-ambiguous statement which won't make you many friends around here. If this is a genuine coin, the owner deserves a realistic return on it.

I cant get a closeup but he sent this before. He was the one offering me the lower price, I wasn't trying to scam him, I think for an ungraded coin its not worth paying someone full value. Thanks for all the advice though, I thought the mint mark looked okay and I'm not sure about the brush detail as you mentioned. I'm trying to look at a 1916s I have for comparison but I don't have any 1916 coins in that kind of condition.

The coins in the last post don't even look to be the same coin as pictured above.

Here's an image I prepared a while back that compares a closeup of a 1916 reverse compared to a late-date reverse.



The master hub was apparently damaged after 1925, and all dimes dated 1926 and later lack this central detail. A minority prior to that date are missing it to, because the dies were polished by mint workers, but the 1916-D dies did not get used for long and never suffered this defect.

Here's a reference for the mintmark style and positions on 1916-D dimes. The 1916-style mintmark was only used for 1916 and part of 1917. Your coin shows a style from later in the series.