| Author |
 Replies: 15 / Views: 3,259 |
|
|
New Member
United States
4 Posts |
Edited by estatebuyersmia
04/18/2020 02:00 am
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Probably fake, but show us much larger pics of both sides, please.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
8938 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4233 Posts |
100% lazy fake. Wrong obverse and wrong reverse types. No need to look at anything else. That coin didn't exist in 1901.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3486 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
6524 Posts |
You only need to post a coin once
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1378 Posts |
Fake as can be! Nice article @ matthewvincent
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1303 Posts |
Counterfeit coins this bad don't scare me, it's the well made ones that worry me. Even I could spot this poor fake from across the room.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1613 Posts |
The real question is, what did you pay? Or to rephrase, get taken for?
ANA member - PAN Member - BCCS Member There are no problems only solutions - the late, great John Lennon
Edited by Ballyhoo
04/18/2020 11:09 am
|
|
New Member
United States
18 Posts |
Unfortunately no where near authentic
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4233 Posts |
+1 on Barber Coin Collectors Society. The website linked by @matthewvincent also has links to online copies of the Lawrence books on Barber dimes, quarters, and halves, under "resources". That article is excellent. It misses the obvious though, and to clarify my above post in case it helps someone - all 1901 and later quarters have Obverse 2 and Reverse 3. This fake is clearly Obverse 1 and Reverse 2. Inner ear and wing tips immediately give it away. You don't need to dig into die pair details to throw this junk in the garbage. Sorry estatebuyersmia. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Thanks for the larger pics. Total fake.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
992 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3486 Posts |
Point taken, kbbpll.
People who stumble upon a "1901-S" quarter may not have the experience
with the Quarter series. Thus the date and mint mark have to suffice.
Edited by matthewvincent
04/18/2020 7:45 pm
|
|
Moderator
United States
187832 Posts |
 to the Community! |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
What surprises me is we have people here who have identified the error of the wrong obv/rev types, but no one even mentioned that the mintmark is laughably wrong.
|
| |
Replies: 15 / Views: 3,259 |
|
Posted 04/17/2020 11:18 pm
