| Author |
 Replies: 19 / Views: 6,183 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4932 Posts |
301859621030 I'm sure this is something no one of you would have caught. Indications: 1. Obverse relief is WAY too high. Has the relief of a Memorial cent from the 60's, similar to a 1968 LMC. 2. Reverse is a mess. Yes, the coin appears to have had a cleaning, but luckily someone ended up cleaning a counterfeit, and not the real thing. 3. Look at the arrows on the pic below. You can see some weird clashing, or something going on under Lincoln's chin. I suspect this is a Pre-1970 fake, maybe Pre-1980.  
|
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
319 Posts |
Quote:
I'm sure this is something no one of you would have caught. Yea, you're surely smarter than all of us. |
|
Moderator
 United States
54280 Posts |
The ones in the date are too large. In the genuine coin, the one of 14 is shorter than the top of the 4. In the FAKE coin, they are the same height. The rims are too thin. The reverse....ONE EN.   Show your financial support of the Coin Community Family (click here)See my topic on Mexican Numismatic Medals (click here) |
|
Pillar of the Community
681 Posts |
It's a fake. I reported it too. Let's see what happens.
|
|
Forum Dad
United States
24150 Posts |
I'm not convinced. The 1 an the 4 look the same height to me...  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6370 Posts |
Looks like die pair 3?  As far as appearance is concerned, I have a 1922 D that looks the exact same.  Quote:
I'm sure this is something no one of you would have caught. This seems egotistical. How would you know? Do you think all of us are dimwits and that you are some numismatic god? I need to post some quarter eagles and see if you can pick real from fake. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7375 Posts |
I'm not sure, but the 4 and the mint mark look very mushy.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6370 Posts |
Quote:
the 4 and the mint mark look very mushy. They tend to get that way when they get worn. Edited by TypeCoin971793
01/29/2016 2:31 pm
|
|
Moderator
United States
54280 Posts |
In all the genuine examples, the 1 of 14 is shorter than the 4. In the fake coin discussed here, the 1 is the same height as the 4. That is one thing that outs it as a definite fake.
Show your financial support of the Coin Community Family (click here)See my topic on Mexican Numismatic Medals (click here) |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
4932 Posts |
Sorry for the stupid sentence, I knew I should have worded that better, as saying "...something not many of you guys may or may not have noticed..." only because given the fact that the coin's date and mintmark are 100% correct, the rest of it is not.
The relief is the dead giveaway here, and should be the giveaway.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6370 Posts |
Quote:
In all the genuine examples, the 1 of 14 is shorter than the 4. In the fake coin discussed here, the 1 is the same height as the 4. That is one thing that outs it as a definite fake. I see what you are talking about, and I completely agree. My gut said bad when I saw it (the rims, weird wear and strike patterns, the large seriffs on the D), but I give these questionable coins the benefit of the doubt to keep everyone honest and not dog piling on it and calling it a fake without any reasoning. Also, in your first picture, your genuine coin was rotated, so I could not tell for certain. I'm still on the fence about this one without seeing it in hand. Would I bid on it? No. Would I call it an outright counterfeit? Ehh... I still don't like that mintmark, and the 1's are a little too tall. My gut says fake. Look at the L in LIBERTY. See how it is cut off? I have seen die-struck counterfeits of the 1955 DDO exhibit the same thing. I would like weight and diameter specs on this coin. But I do have a 1922 D that looks just like this one, but it was dipped in something really bad. About that high relief:   If the relief is okay, and the date and mintmark are 100% legit, then by your logic it should be okay. Edited by TypeCoin971793
01/29/2016 7:20 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6370 Posts |
Lower grade coins of the similar era.  |
|
Valued Member
United States
398 Posts |
CHD you have a gifted eye and solid knowledge but no on second attempt to rewrite not good either but you do recognize there is an issue ..... Maybe try something like this:
Hey fellow collectors look what I dug up, sneaky but check it out:
1. bla bla bla
2. bla bla bla
3. bla bla bla
Next line if you want kinda to toot your own horn:
Bet they thought they could put that one past us! (Notice the word US at the end .... Include who you are writing too if you want them to be a part)
Anyways back to the coin ..... Color me, not sure!
Edited by LocalCoinGuy
01/29/2016 7:28 pm
|
|
Moderator
United States
54280 Posts |
Quote:
because given the fact that the coin's date and mintmark are 100% correct, I disagree. There were five genuine dies for the 1914-D, and this coin's date matches none of them. Show your financial support of the Coin Community Family (click here)See my topic on Mexican Numismatic Medals (click here)Edited by nss-52
01/29/2016 10:08 pm
|
|
Moderator
United States
54280 Posts |
Quote:
I'm not convinced. The 1 an the 4 look the same height to me... They are not supposed to be. Show your financial support of the Coin Community Family (click here)See my topic on Mexican Numismatic Medals (click here) |
|
Pillar of the Community
681 Posts |
The weak reverse is very unusual.
|
| |
Replies: 19 / Views: 6,183 |
Posted 01/28/2016 6:28 pm
