| Author |
 Replies: 15 / Views: 1,918 |
|
|
Valued Member
204 Posts |
A friend of mine who is not really a collector of coins but is one of those guys who buys estates like he needs to in order to breath but he gets ok coins every now and then. He bought a collection and he believes (hopes) he has a 1901-s quarter in there. He sent me pictures which are (as usual) not great. Now I've have never, ever seen a raw 1901-s quarter. Ever. All of been altered but I try and be objective for each coin because you never know. From what I see the coin looks wrong. The date looks too big and the mint mark looks too close to the "D". Anybody want to play devil's advocate and tell me I am wrong and it could be genuine?   |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3155 Posts |
I'm no expert on this series but that nine doesn't look right for some reason. I want to be wrong but I'll defer to those who are more knowledgeable in this series.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7620 Posts |
That fake toning around the devices is a dead giveaway that your friend's coin is a recently manufactured Chinese counterfeit.
(Not to mention that the lettering, mintmark and date don't look right either!)
I vote "counterfeit"! Others may have a different opinion.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4469 Posts |
Below is the date position of the die pair that the OP coin would need to match as the other die pair for the date is totally different. The position of the S mint mark does appear to be off on the OP coin. From the OP photos can not tell about the date position because of the poor photo quality. OP coin:  Genuine Coin:  OP Coin:  Genuine Coin:  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4469 Posts |
Can we get a better photo of the date position on the obverse?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
2843 Posts |
On the off-chance that this is real. It would be very valuable. Touching it could cause damage. You might want to let your friend know....
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3210 Posts |
I think it's fake it just doesn't look right. Maybe your friend should send it to Anacs to verify if it is real or not...if it is real crossover it to NGC or PCGS
|
|
Valued Member
United States
403 Posts |
Odds are against your friend, as forgeries are said to outnumber genuine issues for this date. Space in field above first one in date seems too tight for the genuine die. Yes, better photos are needed.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6370 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4963 Posts |
I'm sorry to say that your friend probably doesn't have what he thinks he has. The fact that this coin is fake makes me question the authenticity of the others in the collection he purchased.
Edited by Numisma
05/27/2016 09:37 am
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
20753 Posts |
Is he selling that one or lots of coins? And for what price?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2205 Posts |
The art and lettering on the reverse just look a little too thick.
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
699 Posts |
It's a fake. I'll try and add mine here ( am on the iPad ) ...please bear with me.  Seems as though the reverse image is too large.... Will add Reverse once I get on the Lap Top. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Just can't be right. The date itself is comical-looking.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4416 Posts |
IMHO, it has "the look" of a fake. The even, dull gray color, XF condition with lack of wear or marks, slightly inflated letters are what I see as "the look." Weight?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1748 Posts |
I would trust Elbesaar on this one. He knows Barbers like the back of his hand.
|
| |
Replies: 15 / Views: 1,918 |
|
Posted 05/26/2016 1:46 pm
