| Author |
 Replies: 13 / Views: 2,268 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7390 Posts |
i wont even attempt a raw Trade dollar purchase without the help of ccf but I do kinda want one as the design is growing on me. A little help with these 2 please, thanks...    |
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
Nothing alarms me about their authenticity and the chops are a (slight) point in favor. Chopmarks limit the buying audience somewhat, though, so that could work for you now and against you later. Where do you stand regarding grading and pricing these on your own?
I'm a little weirded out by the chops on the first one, but probably because the one next to the date minds me of a Masonic symbol. Let's not take this to the bank, though. Of the two, I clearly prefer the second. The chops have really damaged the first, even though there are hints that the surfaces are nice and I think it's the higher-graded one on a technical basis. But not by much.
Both are slightly circulated. Hesitate to ever give a Mint State grade to a chopped coin; it's highly unlikely since someone had to handle it to chop it, and someone had to hand it to them to do so.
That's circulation.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1704 Posts |
They look good. All of the areas which lack detail on fakes have the detail of a genuine coin. To be sure, if you can weigh them. Where and who is selling these? The grading services are now giving chop marked Trade dollars actual grades unlike the details label of two years ago. |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
7390 Posts |
SD, everything you said regarding the differences between them and which one and why is exactly what I was thinking! Right down to the American looking "chop" near the date. That's strange! and second is my favorite too... I have not studied trades from Adam so my grading and knowledge is relative to morgan crossover.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
709 Posts |
The first one looks fairly legit. I'm not an expert on Trade dollars, but comparing to real examples it looks right. However, the second one I believe is fake. It already raises flags that it looks UNC and has chop marks (foreign symbols?). The shape of the date does not look right to me. The digits are too close together and the inside of the loops of the 8 should be bigger - note how small and circular they are. Correct me if I am wrong, but like with Indian cents, the inside of the loops should be big and oval shaped (like on the first coin). |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
709 Posts |
Also, tell me that "2" in 420 Grains 900 Fine on the second coin doesn't look waaay off compared to the first coin.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4883 Posts |
The chopsmatks seem atypical on each of these, being they're not readily identifiable as translatable Chinese characters. I think the damage to the reverse of the first takes it out of consideration, as that will definitely earn it a "details" annotation. But I'm not especially keen on either of these.
Colligo ergo sum
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8904 Posts |
Just me: I don't like either one. The first one looks authentic but I would much prefer a more "Chinese" looking chop-mark symbols if I were going for a chop-marked Trade dollar. (At least the chop-marks are in the filed not right on Miss Liberty...) I don't believe the second one is authentic. The chop-marks look contrived and there is no damage to the opposite side where the chop-marked would have deformed the metal. Plus it looks too shiny, which may show a polishing (or just a fake). |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7390 Posts |
Well I'm in no rush so I think I'll just pass for now on these. Thanks everyone!
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
I'm going to sit back and re-evaluate in view of subsequent posts. I will say, if the bottom one is fake it's a good one. Chopmarked near-Mint Trade dollars do not bother me. The original merchant could have assayed and chopped it, because that was the process and most Trade dollars arrived in the Orient as Mint State coins, and it then stayed in his possession until the event which brought it back Stateside. |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
10625 Posts |
I'm certainly no expert in this field, but from what I've seen here on CCF is the fake Trades have very unconvincing denticles and these two examples look legit to me.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
I think the first is probably a genuine Trade dollar, but I don't think thos are chopmarks, I think they are just damaging counterstamps. The second puts up big red flags for me. Those are LARGE deep marks on both sides. But in neither case is there any indication of denting or flattening or anything on the opposite side of the coin from the punching |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
36744 Posts |
Second one does look fake, for reasons stated by others and the mushy detail of the eagles feathers. The first one looks genuine.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
212 Posts |
The first one is legit I'd say, but the second just looks really fishy with that "2" in "420 grains"
|
| |
Replies: 13 / Views: 2,268 |
|
Posted 04/16/2015 3:16 pm
