| Author |
 Replies: 22 / Views: 2,215 |
|
Valued Member
United States
78 Posts |
Interested in what grade you'd give this and if the small area of misshapen edge at the top of the reverse will affect the chance of a straight grade? I'm trying to learn as much as possible. Thanks for the help.   |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2869 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4469 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4680 Posts |
 rim hit is enough to also make it slightly noticeable on the obverse as well. VG Details. |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
5674 Posts |
Agree with VG details for the rim bump.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
On review, agree the rim bump will likely detail it.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
19183 Posts |
Pretty much in accord with all above.
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
78 Posts |
Thank you gentlemen... all part of the learning curve.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2125 Posts |
VG10. Hope I'm wrong but it looks like there may be some evidence of a removed mint mark under the wreath. Go to heritage and compare the date position of a verified example with yours. A coin as rare as this should be graded by a 3rd party.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2869 Posts |
I agree with the need to take it to a TPG |
|
Valued Member
United States
465 Posts |
VG 10. Agree I'm concerned about the inconsistency where the mint mark would be.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
78 Posts |
Interesting observations about the mint mark. My Great Aunt had this in her collection for at least 70 years. But I suppose nefarious characters are not a modern invention... I took a closer look at the area just under the wreath, where a mint mark would be. Using a 10X loop, I don't see any evidence of an old mark... but I'm certainly no expert. I found the example on the left for sale on ebay, 1894 in a graded (F-12) NGC slab. My coin is the picture on the right. I'm totally new to this but tried to compare the date position in relation to the dentils. Looks the same to me. Kinda fun to do some investigating. Thanks for the inputs. I will plan on making it one of my first submissions.  |
|
Valued Member
United States
78 Posts |
For fun, here is a blow up of the area in question on 1894 my coin. Gotta love macro photography!  |
|
Valued Member
United States
78 Posts |
More investigation...
The real 1894-P should have Vam-3 Doubled Reverse.
From VAMWorld:
The only die pair known to produce genuine examples of the circulation issue of this key date. Many skillfully executed forgeries exist, authentication by competent professionals is recommended.
I've been using my loop and looking for the doubling, but not really seeing it. With the wear and the gunk on the coin it's hard to tell. This may well be one of those skillfully execute forgeries.
The education continues...
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5674 Posts |
That's a good thought about the possibility of a removed MM. I did an overlay of the date with a genuine 1894-P VAM-3, and the date position of the OP coin is an exact match. Given the amount of circulation wear, the other die markers might not be identifiable. My inclination is that it's genuine, but it certainly would be worth sending it to a TPG so they can examine it in hand and get it authenticated. |
| |
Replies: 22 / Views: 2,215 |
Posted 07/07/2021 7:15 pm
