JKK

I do not see a coin that I would identify as plated in gold, the metal Au. It has a brassy color to it that might or might not be gold. It could also be hideously cleaned and discolored, for example. I'm saying I can't tell. What I'm trying not to come out and say explicitly, but very well if you like, is that the pictures are the problem. I don't know that I can trust the color, especially through the plastic flip. Photos can be deceiving. What you see is a coin you can hold up at any angle to any type of light, slip out of a flip, and examine. What I see is what appears to be a brass IHP, photo too small, through plastic. I doubt that's what it is, so I have to speculate. You think it's plated in gold. I lack clear enough evidence to concur. I think it unlikely someone plated it in brass. It's at least possible someone brutally cleaned it, altering the way the photos report the color. I don't know.

It is not customary for us to give specifics about counterfeit/replica identification. However, if you were to look up an image of a known authentic one, and started to compare its layout to this one, I think you'd find that illuminating. Your instincts were correct, so well done there. We do see a couple of fakes a week. This issue is in a very select frequent faker category (along with 1776 Continental Dollars, 1804 silver dollars, 1943 copper pennies, etc.), if you will, so I for one always start by assuming it counterfeit, with the burden of proof on showing authenticity. I have yet to see anyone post an owned real one.

I don't have any evidence that convinces me it's plated in gold. Looking at the photo of the front, gold doesn't usually get crudulated that way. I do think it's a worn IHP. Whether it's plated or not doesn't change anything except to lower its value; if it is plated, that makes it an altered/damaged coin.

Fake or replica. I see many discrepancies between this one and a known authentic one.

There's no good reason to believe it is struck on the wrong planchet. Even with no effort made to take it out of the saflip for photographic clarity, one can tell that it's a well-worn IHP. Maybe someone plated it; maybe the look is from an odd cleaning, but it's been subjected to some form of abuse because that's not the right color for its stage of existence.

If you want to take the horizon beyond US coins, you can buy assorted bags of foreign coins for pennies per piece. Some of them will be shiny and all will be learning opportunities.

Granted tastes vary, but have you ever seen a proof Barber coin? When you see all the detail the designer intended, it does provide a different perspective on his work.

Well, if you had instead hit them with a hammer and nail, you'd probably have seen a different result. My .22LR rounds weren't sharply pointed, nor made of steel.

It's not uncommon for hard impacts to push up some metal around them (it has to go somewhere, of course) in this way. Some coins look like they have little volcanoes on them this way.

No. Damaged, worth 25c.

El dice: Si, eso esta hecho con un cuño falso siguiendo la variedad B-14. Es falso, casi cierto. (Not precise to the word, but the basic meaning. I can't figure out how to say "hub" in Spanish in its numismatic context.)

El dice: A menos que estoy equivocado, este dolar es uno de los cuños falsos anversos. Si Conder101 veria esto, el debe poder confirmarlo, porque el lo vi aqui mas o menos un año pasado. Fuieron algunos similares al mismo tiempo.

Google traduzca la ultima linea (mira a arriba; el no entiende tampoco). El pensaba que "guards" podria ser lineas de separacion verticales, pero no sabe como parece la inscripcion del canto. Parece inautentico, pero si los fotos son hechos con escaner, el cree que eso deforma el aspecto. El pregunta mas fotos (y estoy de acuerdo, porque esto puede solamente ayudar, el canto incluido). Thanks, kbb. That's not precise on my part, but should convey the intent satisfactorily. I added a request for shots of the edge lettering.

He says: the coin in question measures 40mm and weighs 26.95g. On the edge it says: One dollar - Unit hundred cents, besides stars and [term I can't discern; could mean milling, could mean rims]. El anverso me parece incorrecto; el color, los detalles. Es similar a muchos que hemos visto, pero los rayones no son normales. El elevado abajo me parece como craque de cuño. El reverso tiene color mejor y menos desgaste, muy curioso cuando comparado al anverso. What do you all think? To me, the front looks fakey, and the scratches are odd (as is what looks like a die crack). Back looks better but maybe too much better.

Understood. I bet it'd get good money in a favela, if one dared go there. The nice thing about acetone is that if your friend gives you some, it will evaporate. No evidence. If you get a small amount, I would use it very sparingly, as it may take repeated soakings to get all the slime off. Two coins do not require much acetone in order to clean.

That's unfortunate about acetone availability because one really isn't supposed to use nail polish remover. That said, if I had to choose between leaving PVC slime on the coins and using the slightly wrong thing, I'd use the slightly wrong thing. Is there any sort of a local business that uses real acetone that would let you use a little? Got a friend who works in a lab? By the way, your Kushan piece, if your ID is correct, would be from from c.150 CE, not BCE. It's challenging to find good references for Kushan coinage. I recently went through a whole bunch of it.

El ve un ejemplo de la variante Overton 119, autentica. El quiere ver fotos del dolar 1795. (Yo tambien.)

El dice que el no sabe nada sobre esos, pero esto no le grita 'falso'. El vi que el reverso tiene un craque similar al uno en la variedad Overton 107a, pero los detalles son diferentes que aquella. Si Ud. hablaba a la tipografia del borde, el cree que es mas probable que es autentico (estoy de acuerdo con el sobre eso). El dice finalmente que se saben 19 cuños anversos y 22 reversos, y espere que un experto llegara. (kbb: not a precise translation, but conveys the gist. Thanks for pitching in.)

El peso y el diametro son creibles por un ejemplo autentico con uso medio a mucho. Ud. puede ver aqui un ejemplo sin uso. No soy especialisto en dolares de pelo fluyendo, pero un comparison visual me hace pensar que el suyo es autentico. Normalmente los reproducciones tienen color incorrecto, or tienen errores pequeños. Los hoyitos al reverso son tipicos de mucho uso. Mi guia roja (referencia importante de monedos estadounidenses) me dice que hay tres clases del 1795: fecha normal, fecha recortada, tres hojas abajo cada ala. El libro dice tambien que hay algunas variaciones raras. No los conozco bastante bien para decir, pero se como preguntar al equipo: Hey, regulars, do you agree with me that this is a worn but authentic-looking 1795 flowing hair half? If so, do you think it fits any of the subtypes or variations? Our visitor here can use some help. I can translate, more or less, if you'd like. I encouraged him to post pics before sending them in. He's also got a '95 dollar which I explained was a very commonly counterfeited piece, but we haven't seen his yet, so that jury hasn't even convened.

Ud. puede poner los fotos aqui, sin problema. Necesitamos todos los dos lados, bien cortados y claros. Pero adelante, necesito decir a Ud. que estos monedos son frecuentemente falsificados. Los vemos aqui regularmente, y normalmente podemos ver a la primera mira que son reproducciones. Si Ud. los pone aqui, Ud. puede recibir contestas mas rapidos. Es mucho mas barato que mandarlos a NGC para recibir autenticaciones y grados.

The reverse can only harm a grade, goes the conventional wisdom. AG-3 in my view.

This is just posting a random coin with zero reason to think of doubling. This is where self-education needs to come in at some point.

That would seem to depend upon the auction house's policies, n'est-ce pas?

Nasty color, looks chemically treated at some point. Even so, still an 09-VDB, looks like VG-12 details

Pics.