| Author |
 Replies: 16 / Views: 2,610 |
|
Valued Member
United Kingdom
298 Posts |
Can any of you guys who are familiar with this coin tell me if this looks the real deal? Sorry these pictures are the best I have - its from someone who doesn't 'do' coins and from an estate clearance sale. I'm used to seeing obviously fake 1799 dollars in bulk collections, but not this coin.   |
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10982 Posts |
I'm concerned. This is a better date and with that much detail it's potentially a $500+ coin. If you have return privileges, pay with a credit card, and get it cheap it would be worth scooping up.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
5417 Posts |
The bust is a bit off and as BH1964 said, this is a valuable coin. Ask for a return policy and pay with Paypal and you should be good.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8137 Posts |
That dot looking thing on her face has me concerned...
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8904 Posts |
1870 S Half Dollar for comparison:  
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8904 Posts |
Looking at my Half Dollar versus yours makes me suspicious of the date (the 7 particularly). Can you post a close up of the date?
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12437 Posts |
The 1870-S only used three reverse dies, all with a very small mintmark. One tail die has the mintmark placed well below the curve of the feather tip and another tail die has a similar mintmark placement in the crotch formed by the feather tip and the olive stem. The third die has a weak to missing upper curve on the S, depending on die state. Moe's coin shows the mintmark position on Die 1. If the mintmark on the 1870-S in question does not match one of the three dies, it is not genuine.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
291 Posts |
I am not an expert on the series although I do collect them, but the first thing that jumped out at me was the 7 in the date which Moe mentioned. It looks wrong. Without better pics, that is the best advice I can give.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3486 Posts |
About the bust being 'off': Looks 'off' to me, too. Note second spot in the neck area.  |
|
Moderator
 United States
16679 Posts |
I don't like it at all. Looks diagnostically incorrect.
Weight would tell for sure.
swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Valued Member
 United Kingdom
298 Posts |
Thanks for the heads up, its in with other nice regular date coins which I don't have any doubts about so i'll factor this into my offer. Guy says the weight is 13g and measures 3cm but for all I know he could have weighed that on non digital kitchen scales and measured it with a ruler and the naked eye quickly.
Think I'm going to listen to the creature on my shoulder screaming at me 'if it looks too good to be true....'
|
|
Valued Member
United Kingdom
298 Posts |
Having looked at the date again (sorry thats the best picture I have of it) the '1' of 1870 looks wrong to me too? On the real thing the top of the 1 is curved whereas 'my' example it appears flat.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
You spotted the 1 before I saw the thread. Allof the 1870's should use the same date punch sothey should all be the same. The 1 on the OP coin does not match the 1 on the coin Moe145 posted. The 7 may be off as well but I can't see it as well on the OP photo.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8904 Posts |
 I hadn't noticed the "shovel/wedge" head of the 1 versus the curved 1 of my 1870 S. I guess that's why this Forum is worth its salt!  |
|
Valued Member
United States
243 Posts |
The 1 and 7 looks different between both of them as well to me.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8904 Posts |
If anyone is not yet convinced, here's a blow up of the clearest picture of an 1870 date I have on my computer:  |
| |
Replies: 16 / Views: 2,610 |
Posted 01/14/2014 7:25 pm
