• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Does this 1916-D Mercury Dime look genuine?

Started by MarkFeld,

25 posts in this topic

RGT

RGT

Posted
Posted

I've never owned one and am not too familiar with these. That said, I've seen a few pictures of them. It seems to me that the ones that I have seen with this much wear on the rims also have the rim worn down into the mintmark. Perhaps someone placed the mintmark a bit high on this one? Other than that, the picture is too small to tell much for someone like myself who is unfamiliar with the diagnostics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lkenefic

lkenefic

Posted
Posted

Unless this one was broadstruck I'd have to agree with Mike in that there's something up with the rims on this particular piece...but other than that, it looks real to me...did I just sufficiently hedge my bets here ;)

 

Leo

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BillJones

BillJones

Posted
Posted

I can't answer that from the photo. There are two double punched mint mark varieties of this coin, but this photo is too small to see that. It's looks like seriffs are thick, which would be a marker on a worn coin like this one, but photo does not provide enough information.

 

I would not bid on this coin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cpm9ball

cpm9ball

Posted
Posted

I'm not well-versed on this series, but the date, particularly the xx16, doesn't look right. It looks like there is greater spacing between the first "1" and the "9", yet it appears that the spacing is closer between the x916. Also the top of the "6" looks like it may be a tad too long. The very top of it almost comes even with the lowest point of the nape of Liberty's neckline. In other pictures I've seen, it is slightly to the southeast.

 

Chris

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PerryHall

PerryHall

Posted
Posted
from what i know, every single 1916D should have a slightly rotated reverse.. around 10 degrees or so to the left.

 

i think that's the main characteristic to look for.. correct me if i'm wrong.

 

Since four different reverse dies were used, it's unlikely all four were rotated to the same possition.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hoard

hoard

Posted
Posted

It is hard to tell from these photos but it does look like the mint mark area does not appear correct. There seems to be a concave area on the branch just to the northeast above the mimtmark. The mintmark does not look close enough to the branch, leading me to believe the mintmark was applied skillfully. I thought that this area of the branch stem was generally fairly straight not concave.

 

Also there appears to be something stamped at six o'clock on the reverse rim.

 

Please let us know the answer. thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jesbroken

jesbroken

Posted
Posted

I agree with the rotated reverse, but it can be rotated either direction. Why do you assume this coin has been flipped over exactly top to bottom? It could have a rotated reverse that has been straightened after the flip. The mint mark looks normal to me. This is an AG3 coin-broadstruck I would imagine. Unless more information was given I would believe this to be a genuine coin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rbrown4

rbrown4

Posted
Posted

Based on the images presented I have no reason to believe that it is not a genuine 1916 D. I appears to represent what I would expect of this coin in this condition.

 

Rey

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jgrinz

jgrinz

Posted
Posted

hm

 

It Looks real and probably is BUT the edges almost looks like it was 'squished' into some sort of mounting ... of course its just my opinion ...

 

I do own one :)

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cpm9ball

cpm9ball

Posted
Posted
hm

 

It Looks real and probably is BUT the edges almost looks like it was 'squished' into some sort of mounting ... of course its just my opinion ...

 

I do own one :)

 

 

 

Then why don't you post a photo for comparison? Please! :foryou:

 

Chris :hi:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
michael

michael

Posted
Posted

looks like a hollowed out coin out inside another diffrerent coin and then put back together one side 1916 the other with a d reverse looks really odd

 

but without in hand sight seen evaulation cant tell for sure from the photos

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jackson64

jackson64

Posted
Posted

If you are asking because it is an example of your craftmanship then you need to keep working at it....just kidding...anyhow, it appears pretty obvious to me that a "D" mint coin was hollowed out and a 1916 dime was cut down to fit inside. This is one of the poorer examples of this type of forgery I have seen {and I've seen a few} usually the "fill" coin is more exact in both circumferance and thickness {so that there is no height variance or visible joint}...and the ridge lines between the two parts are so obvious that they couldn't be disguised no matter how much they buffed/ground the rims....the sloping angle at the rim is also a great clue to this method....there is one test that can be imprecise but very telling...use a caliper for the thickness and compare it to that of an equally worn dime..not conclusive but if it's thicker by a bit then you have your answer--however if they are the same it still doesn't mean that it's the real deal.....at last resort, you can send it to me and I will take it to my lab and look at it under 100X microscopy for fusion lines....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
  • Author
Posted
...anyhow, it appears pretty obvious to me that a "D" mint coin was hollowed out and a 1916 dime was cut down to fit inside
That was my thought/guess. I don't own the coin, but the Ebay seller who does claims that it was declared genuine but cleaned by PCGS.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing