EagleRJO

Interesting that fakes like that are still floating around in change. I doubt it's silver, but if it is that would be a windfall.

You don't need to even weigh this one which is very likely not close anyway. The counterfeiter forgot to put a denomination of this fake ... pretty bad. And nobody should be fooled into thinking you can read a few linked articles about counterfeits and plow ahead buying raw coins that are not in grading service slabs. That would be doing a disservice to those reading that.

Greenstang gave you a good answer, but in case that didn't sink in the following webpages have a detailed explanation on doubled dies and worthless machine doubling. So you could have working dies with doubling that become loose in the coining press, which could create yet another but different secondary impression of the devices or characters. But it would look different per the infographic posted above. https://doubleddie.com/58222.html https://doubleddie.com/144801.html Your 1983 MO 1-Onza coins do not match any known doubled dies looking thru identified ones on several sites, and it is a lower value modern 1-ounce silver bullion coin where you can expect there to be fewer varieties attributed. Have you carefully looked at the coins to see if the doubling appears shelf like?

Yes Also to all, please disregard any comments which may lead people to be fooled into thinking you can read a few linked articles about counterfeits and look at some genuine examples to plow ahead buying raw coins that are not in grading service slabs. That would be doing a disservice to those reading that.

It seems like you are posting two different coins, Piece #1 and Piece #2, you think may have either a Doubled Die Reverse or a Tripled Die Reverse. See the attached infographic to help identify "machine doubling" which is what there appears to be on these coins, and which would not be a variety or add any value. If you look at one of the referenced NGC VarietyPlus images for the attributed 1983 MO 1-Onza DDR (see attached) you should notice the doubling appears to be at the same level as the original character, like at the "1", with an offset or "notch" at the corners. The photos of your coins are not the best, but it looks like it is step or shelf like with a lower doubled area, which would be machine doubling. If you look carefully at the coins in-hand with good lighting you should be able to see if it's machine doubling with a step or shelf like appearance without any notching.

You are incorrectly mixing strike type (e.g. Proof or PF) with an adjectival grade modifier (e.g. Brilliant, Choice or Gem) so definitively. A proper example would be "Gem Uncirculated" or " Gem BU". I think you need to start over from scratch so you don't keep putting your foot in your mouth. https://www.ngccoin.com/coin-grading/grading-scale/ https://www.ngccoin.com/coin-grading/grading-scale/adjectival-grades/ And as Sandon noted at the beginning of this thread it's a duplicate post that has already been answered in detail. https://boards.ngccoin.com/topic/431894-cert-of-authenticity-by-the-washington-mint-helpful/

I was just thinking maybe the opposite is true, as least with this topic. Where are the typical website and webpage references for errors, or links to topics with additional resources? Or maybe some people occasionally just get tired of seeing the same damaged coin posts.

I don't think the date is that far off, but there are other significant differences comparing it to genuine examples such as the portrait face as well as the eagles wing notches and wreath on the reverse in particular, which are not even close. That with the weight being so far off and it's very likely a counterfeit. @Attribal If you don't have die variety references for that coin series or know how to do the noted comparisons then you likely should stick with slabbed coins.

pH is some pretty "basic" stuff ... ... so I have no idea how he mixed that up.

I would only consider a scope if you are also going to use it for things like identifying die indicators for varieties and authentications. Otherwise a phone camera should work fine. Most phones these days have decent digital cameras that you just have to practice with and use properly, like resting your hand on something to steady the phone and keeping the phone close to the coin so the auto focus is only picking up on the coin. And the lighting is very important. For a deeper dive see the following articles on coin photography and tools ... https://coinimaging.com/photography.html https://www.pcgs.com/news/tools-of-a-professional-coin-grader

That is a nice one I would probably try to acquire since it's from my home state, which is how I collect tokens. It's likely already been mentioned, but I use TokenCatelog.com to search for info on tokens. Any other good token sites? https://tokencatalog.com/token_record_forms.php?action=DisplayTokenRecord&td_id=104215&inventory_id=279083&td_image_id=151332&attribution_id=105091&record_offset=1

Okay, I'll bite since it's Tuesday. Here is one of my tokens that reminds me of @Hoghead515's beard.

You could have just said a "strong acid" such as the example acids listed, which Bob is correct would have a very low pH in solution. There are acids which are stronger, like perchloric acid, but not as common as those three. And digging thru the chemistry cobwebs I think some weak acids are highly corrosive to certain metals. But I'm not even sure why the type of acid is really an issue.

It does look like the cheesy gold plated coins from say the Danbury or Merrick private mints with a very thin gold plating that would not affect the weight much, like the attached. Possibly also exposed to some type of corrosive due to the damage as well as rough or dimpled appearance of the remaining plating.

It may just be a layperson who watched too many clueless tuber click-bait vids and thinks there may be value in something that just looks different. @Wallygirl72455 if you are interested in coin collecting and error coins let us know and we can point you in the right direction with some reputable resources.

I don't know about you guys, but for this pretty worn and damaged coin I am seeing significantly more detail where there should be less from the die polishing as in better condition attributed examples of a 1936-D 5C 3-1/2 Leg variety.

Well, at least you have good taste in cars, except maybe for the color given the reference

I don't know why dprince keeps bumping this thread, or thanking others who bump the thread, as it really doesn't paint him in a good light. Maybe he hopes to somehow recover from the train wreck, but as Coinbuf aptly pointed out the train is already off the rails. File this mystery along with Where is Hoffa Buried.

I agree that the coin is likely not the 1936-D 5C 3-1/2 Leg variety. It looks like the coin is just worn, damaged or altered to have the appearance of part of the bison's right foreleg missing in the area identified with arrows above. This variety was the result of over-polishing the die to remove erosion lines, and other indicators or affected areas besides right at the arrow do not look like a match to me. I would do some more research, like looking at the NGC VarietyPlus image, and more carefully examine the coin in-hand before you drop around $100 or so on a submittal. And what dprince1138 is doing is completely different. He is not asking about varieties, he is simply flipping raw coins claiming they are particular varieties when he has already misattributed several, and refuses to be open or answer basic questions asked, which as a minimum gives the appearance of shady dealings. You on the other hand seem to be taking a pretty straightforward approach, and don't have a problem being open or answering questions.

Yup, he is trying to drum up business to flip these garbage raw coins under the guise of a "PSA". Posting where to find the ebay link quoted confirms that. You can put lipstick on a pig, but you can't make a horse drink the cool-aid.

Maybe with the large plating holes, but then there are the smaller charred spots like at the rim and the memorial on the reverse. Also, it looks too random to be intentional.

I have to admit that one was funny, and how interesting is a forum without some occasional humor. Maybe if he lightens up a bit he won't bash the newbies so harshly which grinds my gears.

Sometimes location is a factor when in a more prominent location as identified in the ANA standards, and it doesn't seem to me it's always about better eye appeal. I have also stared at a straight grade and a "+" grade with what looked like similar marks with similar appeal just scratching my head. Well maybe one of these days in a galaxy far far away the light bulb will go on, but I'm not that worried about it for now. Then again if I kept at it the bulb might go on sooner rather than later.

Hmmm, I guess in bowling you use "doubling strike" for consecutive strikes or "double strike" for pins that may move around when they are struck, like dies sometimes move when a coin is struck. That's why bowlers who have been in tournaments might confuse double strike with strike doubling, which I think should be "machine doubling" anyway. We all make mistakes occasionally, and not long ago I remember posting the completely wrong coin. But I owned the mistake while correcting that, instead of making useless excuses related to some other hobby I had. This does sound like just another excuse for getting it wrong again, and maybe he should just lurk and learn more for a while.