Counterfeit Trade Dollar [pics Added]

I was asked to comment on this 1875 S Trade dollar. The pictures posted are in my opinion completely adequate to diagnose the forgery in this particular case. It would be nice to examine a coin like this in person but only to verify exactly HOW it was made. It is not necessary to see the coin in person for me to be 100% sure it is a forgery.

Look closely at the photo of the edge of the coin. The edge is reeded BUT the reeds were not formed in a collar. They were applied to the coin after it was created by forcing the coin through a ring die. The diagnostic is the top of the reed itself - there is a dark line running near the center of several reeds. This is caused by metal which is displaced by the ring die coming together (curling upward and inward) at the center of the top of the reed. In a collar die the metal is forced into the reeding by the pressure of the strike and it does NOT leave that seam line. The ends of the reeds formed in this way are normally hollow and on the edge of the coin that passes through the ring die last there are traces of excess metal that "drags behind". I call the effect split tailed reeds.

In this case, the forgers (who I would bet were Chinese) ground off both ends of the reeds (the split tails). If you notice there are mechanical abrasion lines on both corners of the coin and the scratch marks all are parallel from the coin being held against a spinning grindstone.

There is also some evidence of grinding visible on the faces of the coin itself. These are seen in the area between the dentils and the edge of the coin. On the first Obverse picture it appears that two passes of the grindstone were made at slightly different angles. There are two different sets of angled scratches.

On the Reverse there is a spot above the second T is STATES which indicates the coin was either cast or was struck on a cast planchet. The dark areas near the edge look to me like casting defects.

In looking at the design details I am also bothered by several instance of lines not being "clean". By this I mean that the details lack sharp crisp definition. Some lines look irregular with tiny bumps. This is a result of the image transfer process. A real host coin is usually employed to make an impression using one of many techniques. The transfer to the die can be direct or indirect and can be sharp or very course. The transfer methodology here is very good - not perfect but very good.

The defects I see, especially the reeds are typical of this kind of MODERN forgery and if you notice the clues are NOT reliant upon a detailed analysis of the coin itself. I tend NOT to look at the faces of the coin until the edge passes muster. All you really need to know in this case, is that the originals were struck in a three die press and that this particular coin was edged in a different way. It calls for diligence on the part of the collector to look AND observe with your eyes wide open. All too often we look through eyes that are clouded by the thought of a bargain or the love of the coin itself. We miss obvious problems.

I am not aware of ANACS using metallurgical tests on coins. The last I knew they did not even perform specific gravity measurements. So I do not know if the coin is 35% silver or not. I do believe ANACS did make one mistake. I believe, based on what I see, that the coin was made by casting (specifically injection molding) and that it is unlikely to contain any silver. Of course they did have the coin in hand and I am working only from pictures.

However, as I have said in other posts, there are cases, and this certainly is one where pictures are completely adequate to diagnose a forgery.

I would also be more than happy to send the coin to you for further analysis on its mode of creation.

xshift - If you would like a more detailed reply as to how it was made, by all means send the coin along. My address is
Robert Gurney PO Box 337, Angier, NC 27501

I can post the results and return the coin.

Wow. I'm sorry to hear about this Xshift. I recently purchased a certified PCGS 1876-s trade dollar(I just posted a thread here), and the similarities are startling. That is a very convincing fake. The reeding is definitely different between mine and yours(as swamperbob pointed out). Also, the denticles seem really weak and lacking a connection to the rim in some areas on the reverse from about 12 ocklock to 4 ocklock. I also noticed that several denticles on the obverse seem missing. What's impressive to me about your fake is that the reverse luster seems quite convincing. I didn't know that they can mimic luster that well on a caste fake, if it is caste? Where did you get this coin if you don't mind me asking? I would tend to think it is a die struck fake as ANACS pointed out, but I believe swamperbob is much more knowlegable than I. Anyways, very interesting thread. You have done coin collectors a great favor by posting this! so thanks! :-)

Swamperbob, you seem very very knowledgeable on counterfeits. Especially knowing how exactly mint processes are made, I think this is key. I specialize in gold counterfeits on struck copies, and have taken a class at the ANA in Counterfeit Detection, which I got to study lots of gold fakes. I read often about gold counterfeits, but I am not an expert. I know it is vital to know what a geniune coin looks like, in a paticular series. You're good at what you do, and I have spotted the following things on this Trade dollar:

Spike from dentical at K-11 Obverse

Blob of metal at K-3 Obverse

Another small spike from K-3 Obverse

3 spikes from the denticals below the date Obverse

General loss of detail

Tonypics, I purchased this coin from a forum member.

Tonypics and Johnny.. Both myself and the seller are very interested in the outcome of the investigation. Simply because one: we know Swamperbob knows his stuff.. and we know he will tell it like it is. Two, we were both taken in.. and we don't like that. Three: We want to help out our fellow collector/forum members.

Personally, I absolutely HATE being 'taken'. I know I wasn't by this person who sold it to me because he was as surprised as I was by the attribution by ANACS and is in full support of my posting for opinion. I am trying to make an educational post for our readers going forward - I would LOVE for the tell-tale signs of this fake to be made public if only to save ONE other person from making the same mistake. I have a feeling that Swamperbob's findings will help more than one person, though, which makes this post so much more than worth it.

Wow, 50 years. That's quite impressive.

I'm 21, but I've done my fair share of reading. I took a class too, but mostly just reading. There's a good book on counterfeits I read , Numismatic Forgery. It explains the processes for making counterfeit dies, and the minting process involved. It's a great book. I have always had trouble being intimate with every process of minting, I just need to see it in hand or on video to understand it, I am very visual. In the book he mentions using a lathe to do a variety of different tasks, drilling, boring, etc. Alot of the stuff that is explained in the book I simply do not understand because I do not understand the processes.

At the class with Brian Silliman I learned you need several diagnoses in order to deem a coin counterfeit. I do not think my multiple spike findings is enough for me to deem this coin counterfeit, that is, if I hadn't heard what you said. I would also like to know, what causes these spikes? I remember reading actually about 3% of geniune coins have these too. I remember spotting repeating depressions in Bill Fivaz book, how can you do it I thought to myself! When I finally took the class and got to look at many many counterfeit gold coins and tilting them under an incandescent light, it became easy. I learned that contact marks often are circular (but also linear), blend in with the rest of the fields and because since they are struck (they are contact marks on the geniune coin) they have luster and die flow in them. Additionally contact marks in contrast are "shiny", because of the disrupted metal flow.

You are quite right in the "third edge" of a coin, sometimes numbers or stars will fall off of the third edge on some coins such as "saints", and this can sometimes be an indicator. Or if the reeding is not sharp, (I think)

I look forward to learning more from you. On the cointalk forums, Hobo is the counterfeit expert. I've seemed to find here, you are. Great job.