| Author |
 Replies: 17 / Views: 3,775 |
|
Valued Member
United States
64 Posts |
I just got from ebay 1927 2.5 Indian, very nice looking, but I suspect it is fake. Have strange unusual for gold Indians shine, stars are weak, etc. If not fake it will make MS65. Is this fake or very very weak strike? http://www.ihhdd.org/images/eb/sept/IMG_0193.jpg |
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
14454 Posts |
this incuse design take a special eye to grade but I can tell you its probably nowhere near a 65, the design of the incuse Indians doesn't wear like any other coins minted by the US. All that being said nothing really jumps out as it being fake but the color would be the first thing I would look at and if that doesn't look correct to you then you may want to take it to a dealer and let them see it in hand to give you a better idea because color can change with lighting or even computer monitor and its hard to judge by a picture
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
I'd have it looked at. There appears to be a raised pimple on the the central portion of the Indian's bonnet and some raised lines below his neck and by his mouth, but it could just be the lighting. If fake, it's a high quality die struck fake. I would guess the weight and dimensions are correct, as these fakes would normally be made of 90% gold. These coins should not be purchased raw, especially from ebay as there are many many fake indians out there. It is a very nice looking coin, and I'd expect it to grade high if genuine, though as Bryan said these are very tough to grade so who knows. |
|
Valued Member
 United States
64 Posts |
Yes, the weight is of by 0.1% only. Dimensions are correct. The pimples and lines are not from lighting, they are real. Overall it is really good looking coin, only not ordinary weakness in strike and, if you know, Indians have special uneven shine, this is absent with this coin. Hate to spent $40 to find that my suspicions were correct. ebay now is safe place, they are offering a lot of protection and I can return the coin any time for one and half month. $4.75 loss for mailing. |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
It is a nice looking coin and would be a treasure if real. Raised lines and pimples dont completely condemn the coin as fake, but they are much more common on counterfeits than on genuine pieces, except in the case of die cracks. I'd return it, take the $4.75 loss and put the refund money towards a top tier certified(PCGS NGC ANACS or ICG) example. If the seller is willing to give you time to get it certified with a promise of a refund if it's fake, it might be worthwhile if you got a good deal on the coin. I'd also recommend buying "United States Gold Counterfeit Detection Guide" by Bill Fivaz. Great book with lots of examples. |
|
Valued Member
United States
64 Posts |
This was a good deal. $230 and it comes in cello wrapping that original coins were sold. Attached to an old paper with price tag $18.50. So I guess it was sold at least in mid 1940 or earlier when gold was probably $50 an ounce. I think I should sent it for certification :( or I may think I miss a good coin for being too greedy.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1304 Posts |
I know very little about grading coins but I do have a question. What is the very faint looking numbers above the coin date? Thanks,
Wornslick
|
|
Valued Member
United States
64 Posts |
It is not number. Designer initials. BLP - Bela Lyon Pratt
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8904 Posts |
From comparing your coin to this 1915, I have to conclude yours is (IMO) fake. The top feathers look very flat (with little detail), the necklace has NO detail, and the designer initials are very vague. All the detail normally seen is missing. The color does look a bit off as has already been mentioned. (I hope I'm wrong, for your sake.)   Edited by Moe145
12/16/2009 3:29 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1304 Posts |
Thanks varord. I am hoping for the best outcome on this for you.
Wornslick
|
|
Valued Member
United States
64 Posts |
Thanks Moe145. Exactly, the coin is missing fine details. But if it is very weak strike it may. If it was not this nice I will send it back without hesitation. Just looks (really, believe) extremely nice, not less then MS65. And then MS65 because strike, it has zero post mintage marks. All lines, dings etc are from mintage. And I am in doubt, I think it is fake, and I do not want to lose a good coin :)
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10982 Posts |
If the weight and dimensions are correct, then it's likely a cast gold counterfeit. This coin, if a genuine MS65, is worth over $4,000 so we can rule that out very quickly.
It looks cast to me but I'm no expert. I'd return it for refund or I take it to a dealer who can confirm that it's fake then return it.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
64 Posts |
Thanks. I also think the correct weight is difficult for struck coin (4.175 g instead of 4.179). But then, why this coin have wire rim? For cast coins it should be unusual, or I am wrong?
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10982 Posts |
varord: Post a couple more pics of the reverse and the rim if possible. Counterfeit made of gold can be very good with the weight and the wire rim on the money so to speak.
The pic at the top of this thread doesn't look good. Concave spots near the rim, color off and just plain "not right".
More images would help.
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
At $230 you didn't get taken too bad if the gold content is correct. This is a great lesson learned, and not too expensive of one. Could be cast, but it is definitely WAY better than the average cast...they even appear to have gotten the luster right. My guess is still die struck fake, but would like very much to see a shot of the reverse.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
64 Posts |
I did not feel burned, actually. In the past year I bought this way few Indians, each for around 250, and four of them made PCGS MS64. It seems I do see in very poor pictures coins that have potential. This also have potential :) Just not right one!! The most important for me was first I do see it is questionable. and second, to learn new properties of fake coins.
I will post reverse picture tomorrow, I probably deleted it from my camera yesterday.
|
| |
Replies: 17 / Views: 3,775 |
Posted 12/16/2009 11:25 am
