I think MeadowviewCollector and TypeCoin971793 nailed it. I don't know how much it weighs. It has a nice ring to it but not quite silvery. The brass appearance is how it looks in hand.
Boring story time. I got this coin around 1971 from my grandparents. As a little kid, I was fascinated by the idea that Abe Lincoln could have had it in his pocket. After I became aware of my genealogy, I started thinking perhaps my grandmother got it from her grandfather, George Emory Logue, who fought in the Civil War (enlisted at 17!). Since she also had a musket from the Pennsylvania Regiment carried by another ancestor in the Revolution, it was believable that my great-great-grandfather had kept this dime. I put it in a 2x2, where it has sat since then.
There was a local coin show today, so last night I was going through my coins, thinking about whether I should finally do an ANACS submission, and when I got to this 1861 I looked it up on NGC. I discovered there was a Type 1 and Type 2. Researching the types got me looking closer at the coin. I immediately noticed that something was different around the hand and shield. I stumbled on the site MeadowviewCollector links to. Holy expletive, it's a counterfeit.
Now I start wondering if the scratches across "one dime" were meant to indicate with disgust that somebody got ripped off, and perhaps it was even my ancestor who pulled it from circulation. From the wear it would appear that it got spent to death. I can't believe they went to the trouble trying to reed the rims, such as it is.
MS66 versus mine, with annotations:

* The spacing in the vertical bars in the shield is way off, especially noticeable lower right
* The top of the rock Liberty sits on curves into the top of the banner in the real version, and more abruptly intersects the bottom of the banner in the fake
* There are 36 denticles across UNITED STATES in the real coin, 33 in the fake
* S in STATES appears doubled in my fake
* TA in STATES
* Lower left serif in last A in AMERICA
* Orientation and spacing of digits in 1861
* 11 denticles below 1861 versus 10

* Lots of stuff on the reverse, but most blatant is the missing shaft of seeds
Overall, a convincing 150 year old counterfeit. Had me fooled for 44 years!