| Author |
Replies: 78 / Views: 9,335 |
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
My opinion has not changed - I do not think the US Mint had anything to do with the production of this coin.
As I said, although I think I know what it is not, I do not know what it is and many of those possibilities are things which have both value and collector interest on their own. I'm going to reach out to some of those I know on the forum who have special interest in gold - one of them, Johnny54321, is already watching this thread - and we will see if we can get opinions from those more qualified to judge than I.
|
|
New Member
 Portugal
47 Posts |
If I get a certification can it solve this problem? Or do you think they will use your justifications about the fact that it has been a data 4 years later of the last mintage?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2589 Posts |
I am not an expert on gold dollars, though I do collect them. I'm sure SuperDave and Johnny have seen many more of them than I have. But there are two possibilities that havn't been discussed here. The first very remote possibility is that this was an unreported clandestine strike by the mint of an obsolete type. This is was not an unknown practice at the mint, for example the 1868 large cent was a genuine mint made product though it was made clandestinely. That being said I have never heard of any such fantasy piece being made for the gold dollar series. The second more likely possibility that I can think of is that this was a piece made by a non-us mint operator for use in jewlery. There are many fakes that are 90% or higher gold that were made for use in the jewelry industry as the number of coins available could not meet demand.
-XoG
|
|
New Member
 Portugal
47 Posts |
What is curious is that the characteristics of this coin completely coincide with type 1. another fact is that even approaching rather not see something that tells me that the coin has been tampered with or altered. I got this coin from a coin collector.
|
|
New Member
 Portugal
47 Posts |
have seen many fake coins, but this one I think was one time build not tampered, I dont seen any variation, is very noticible on the pictures
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
685 Posts |
IMO, it's modify "3" to "8"
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6396 Posts |
I also think it is 100% impossible for this coin to be a genuine mint error, for the reasons stated. I believe it is a well-made counterfeit. In addition to the impossible date the style of numerals (especially 1 and 5) and the weak ribbon are features that are clearly different from a genuine Type 1 coin as shown in SsuperDdave's photo.
It can be hard to accept that a coin you treasure isn't genuine but I'm afraid that is the situation. If you want additional opinions you could email Fred Weinberg, an expert American dealer in error coins. He's easily accessible on the 'net.
Thank you for sharing this interesting piece.
|
|
New Member
 Portugal
47 Posts |
dont be fool by the pictures, they got angle,and numbers got some destortion, i´ve tried to take a picture from above of it but without success, so I pass to a scanner here it is
|
|
New Member
 Portugal
47 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21788 Posts |
This coin is not a 'fake', or a 'counterfeit', it is probably better regarded as a 'jeweler's copy'. Perhaps that would be a rather semantic way of putting it, but these things as such abound.
Perhaps some young lady would have been perfectly happy with it. That's OK. Without them (young ladies that is), we wouldn't exist.
|
|
New Member
 Portugal
47 Posts |
check this comparassion I found a certified PCGS Coin (1852 G$1 PCGS MS65 Type 1 Gold Dollar), comparing with my the number one and 5 are not the same as dave showned I will post a photo to compare
|
|
New Member
 Portugal
47 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1903 Posts |
That three way comparison made it stand out to me how superficial the "strike" of the 1958 coin is compared to the other two. This would be indicative of a lower poundage press along with a casting process used to copy the original devices from an original coin. The 1858 is a great discussion/curiosity piece, but as stated earlier, was made for something other than commerce. Nice find though!
|
|
Valued Member
United States
300 Posts |
Why don't you just send it into PCGS or another TPG?
|
|
New Member
 Portugal
47 Posts |
the picture doesn't correspond to real, it doesn't look like that but okay thanks anyway
|
| |
Replies: 78 / Views: 9,335 |