| Author |
 Replies: 27 / Views: 1,396 |
|
New Member
United States
13 Posts |
*** Moved by Staff to a more appropriate forum.  ***I'm new to coin collecting and I came across an interesting Morgan. I first noticed that the reverse of the coin was at a one o'clock angle. From what I understand that is a dead giveaway for a fake. Except this one is in an NGC holder and I looked up the number even called NGC and it is a legit coin. 1878 CC MS 63+. The interesting thing about the mint mark is the C's look like double O's to the fact, they almost touch. Can someone let me know if this is an error or what they call a VAM,or if it is an error with a VAM . Thanks
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5469 Posts |
Hurry up and post some pictures.............
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
58213 Posts |
 To CCF! We'll need pictures in order to help you.
Errers and Varietys.
|
|
New Member
 United States
13 Posts |
I'm trying to, but it will not let me post pictures from my phone
|
|
Valued Member
United States
342 Posts |
You can also post the PCGS number if there are pictures on the PCGS page.
|
|
New Member
United States
13 Posts |
The NGC Number is 8381509-011. When I called NGC and asked why it did not designate it as an error. She said whoever sent it in did not ask for them to check that specifically.
|
|
New Member
United States
13 Posts |
If you look it up under NGC, it shows you pictures
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1789 Posts |
Best I could do from the NGC images.   |
|
New Member
United States
13 Posts |
Yes, that is it. Thank you.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
6726 Posts |
VAM-22 is called out as having possible rotated reverse. So that is not a reason to think it is a counterfeit coin. Here is a link to the 78 CC VAMs. LINK https://vamworld.com/wiki/1878-CC_VAMs-makecents-
|
|
New Member
United States
13 Posts |
So in all reality, it should have been described as a VAM 22 on the holder? |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6726 Posts |
Quote:So in all reality, it should have been described as a VAM 22 on the holder? TPGs will not designate a VAM unless asked by the submitter and papers sent with it to prove what it is. Many folks do not care what VAM it is.
-makecents-
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
18191 Posts |
Quote:So in all reality, it should have been described as a VAM 22 on the holder? Whoever submitted it may not have noticed the rotation. Also, TPGs will not designate varieties unless additional fees are paid.
Inordinately fascinated by bits of metal with strange markings and figures
|
|
New Member
United States
13 Posts |
It shouldn't be considered common and that would make it worth more money, correct?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6726 Posts |
Quote:
It shouldn't be considered common and that would make it worth more money, correct? I don't know that it would be worth much more. Like many "errors", the more extreme, the better. It says for this VAM that it could be 26 degrees to 106 degrees in rotation and yours is towards the lesser end.
-makecents-
Edited by -makecents-
04/07/2025 7:03 pm
|
|
New Member
United States
13 Posts |
What degree would you say it is by looking at the picture
|
| |
Replies: 27 / Views: 1,396 |
Posted 04/07/2025 5:43 pm
