Is this Trade Dollar counterfeit or authentic?

[awb]

I picked up a well worn chop marked trade dollar the other day. I wanted a low grade example, and I wanted the chop marks, indicative of this coin's unique history. I felt comfortable that the dealer was honest, as he's at all the local coin shows, and he got good recommendations from another dealer I visit with.

 

There are a couple of things that make me wonder if the coin may be a fake, although they may not be issues at all. I'd like to hear from the more seasoned collectors to get their thoughts.

 

 

 

The issue that concerns me the most is the eagle on the reverse, as there is very little detail. Could this be caused by the process of counter-stamping the chop marks into the coin? I can certainly imagine this coin sitting on a hard surface while the die for the chop mark is hammered into the coin, obliterating the coin's reverse. There are four chop marks down the center of the coin on the obverse, so this seems plausible to me.

 

The general wear of the coin seems off at first, but it does coincide with the images in the ANA Grading Standards book. Liberty's stomach and leg are extremely flat, almost merging right into the field. As worn as the obverse is, the rim is nearly intact, although the remaining denticles are weak. The reverse rim is much stronger, with most of the denticles showing. The eagle is completely outlined, even though little detail remains in the feathers.

 

This same description could also apply to the image of the trade dollar in Good condition in the grading book. The obverse rim is complete, nearly without denticles, while the reverse rim shows the denticles. Liberty's stomach and leg are flat, with almost no outline remaining, just like my coin.

 

When you drop the coin on the table (gently, of course), it sounds like silver. I weighed the coin, and it is slightly underweight. The coin weighs 26.84 grams (414.2 grains), just slightly less than the supposed weight of 27.22 grams (420 grains). The difference of 0.38 grams is 1.4% of the supposed weight. Is this within the acceptable range for a circulated coin? I woud think as a coin circulates, miniscule amounts of metal are worn off, flaking away, resulting in a slightly underweight coin over time.

 

I checked the scale against an uncirculated Morgan dollar, and the wight was darn close to the supposed weight (26.71 grams versus 26.73 grams).

 

 

 

 

The coin does have the right reverse (Reverse 2, without an extra berry under the talon, arrowhead ends over 2) and obverse (Obverse 2, ends of scroll hard to make out, hand does have four fingers) for an 1877 trade dollar.

 

So what do y'all think? I feel pretty good that the coin is authentic, but there's just enough doubt to make me want to dig deeper. Thanks for any comments.

[MorganMan]

While I am not an expert on this variety, I am gonna call it a fake.

 

2 things stand out at me. First is the 3 marks around the chop mark at 9 o'clock on the obverse. They appear to be small dings and have plating coming off of the coin.

 

The other is the horrible detail on the reverse. It looks to be an obvious casted coin...the hit to make the chop marks would not have made it look that rough all over the coin

 

So my thoughts are it is a plated cast fake....

 

But, I would wait till the experts come along.

 

MM

[James_OldeTowne]

It looks like a genuine coin that, in addition to being chopmarked, has been mangled (damaged) in some way.

[TomB]

The images have me concerned about the coin. One can have extensively chopmarked Trade dollars that still retain more fine detail on the reverse. Below is an example of mine that is in a PCGS F15 holder. You may notice that there is actually wing detail on the eagle where the coin has not been countermarked on the obverse, yet the reaminder of the eagle is nearly obliterated. The second thing that has me concerned is what appears to be a series of three punch marks on the obverse that look like there is an underlying metal that isn't silver peeking through. The dentils on the border also look very weak, without an outer rim around them. Lastly, it appears that two of the obverse punches are the exact same character, which would not make sense to me to have a Trade dollar punched so few times, yet punched multiple times by the same merchant.

[BillJones]

Definitely counterfeit.

 

Although adding the chop marks is a nice touch.

 

As another post said, even a chop marked coin that has had the marks placed on it will continue to show die struck sharpness at somewhere on the coin. This thing has the hallmarks of a crude casting.

[kryptonitecomics]

Looks 100% cast to me......I am not a collector of this series but that coin screams fake to me

[James_OldeTowne]

I am looking at the coin on a different monitor, and am switching positions. I think it is a fake. I can see that the stars are not the right shape, and other details aren't correct.

[jesbroken]

Sooo Fake.

[bsshog40]

It looks cast to me also!!

[Conder101]

The first thing I see is very rough surfaces. Then I not that the edges of the chopmarks where they have pushed up the surrounding metal are smooth and unworn. In otherwords it acquired the low grade and rough surfaces BEFORE the chopmarks were applied. (Compare this to TomB's coin where the pushed up metal around the chops is worn and rounded indicating that it circulated after the chops were applied.) I don't think it is likely that a genuine coin circulated that long and got all those rough surfaces without getting chopped, and then suddenly four our five merchants accepted this cruddy beat up thing and chopped it. At which point it STOPPED circulating.

 

There are other things that don't make a lot of sense. All the obv stars are flat except star 4 which shows near full detail. The detail area on the obv that aren't damaged by the chopmarking apparently show fairly heavy wear. But on the rev the undamaged areas seem to show very little wear. Note the rounded fullness of the 420, the word FINE, and the berries and leaves of the olive branch that show little or no wear.

 

No, I've got many little alarms going off saying "Fake, Fake, Fake!"

[gmarguli]

It looks like some of the roughness extends into the chop marks. Perhaps it was chopped while in high grade and then acquired the roughness (sea damage?) after the chops?

 

Having said that, the coin doesn't look "right" to me.

[awb]

Thanks for the comments, and keep them coming!

 

First is the 3 marks around the chop mark at 9 o'clock on the obverse. They appear to be small dings and have plating coming off of the coin.

I'll post some more detailed pictures tonight of these three marks to see if they shed any more light on it.

 

If it is a cast coin, wouldn't the edge of the coin have a line around it? The edge looks good to me.

 

What about the coin sounding like silver? The coin may have been cast in silver, but is this likely? And what about the weight? Assuming the weight is close enough, it seems odd that someone would go to so much trouble to counterfeit a coin like this, considering what I paid for it.

[Revenant]

What about the coin sounding like silver? The coin may have been cast in silver, but is this likely? And what about the weight? Assuming the weight is close enough, it seems odd that someone would go to so much trouble to counterfeit a coin like this, considering what I paid for it.

 

You're assuming 1) That they weren't able to punch out several of this suckers with the casts and 2) that there isn't a bigger sucker out there who paid more for this than you did when this was initially bought from the Chinese counterfeiter.

 

[construct]

Also, notice the reverse denticles around 5 o'clock. These should rise directly out of the field, but they don't on this coin. Instead, they're mushy and uneven. It's a fake.

[awb]

Here is a close-up of the three marks near the 9 o'clock chop mark. I don't see any material flaking away, but maybe I'm not looking at the right spot. There is a lump at the bottom edge of the lower left mark. Is this indicative of a cast copy?

 

 

 

Here are shots showing the edge of the coin. I'm still wondering how the coin could be cast without signs of a line around the edge.

 

 

 

 

Thanks again for all the comments. If I have made a mistake (probability looks high), I definitely want to learn as much as I can from it. If these new pictures confirm or negate any of the previous comments, please say so.

[TomB]

Your close up images show that the "coin" is likely plated and almost certainly counterfeit.

[rbrown4]

Excellent post and very infomative although at the expense of your experience. However another example of the importance and degree of experience and professionalism of these forums and members.

 

A good learning experience for all of us.

 

Rey

[awb]

I took the coin to a local dealer yesterday, and he said it definitely looked suspicious, although he was less certain than the consensus here that it is a fake. He thought that one of the chop marks, the one in the center of the obverse, looked like it may have been cast into the coin, while the others appeared to have been counter stamped.

 

The next coin show is in two weeks, and I expect to see the dealer I bought the coin from there. I'd like to return the coin to him, in trade for something else, since he'd be less likely to hand me cash back. I'm trying to figure out how to handle the situation as diplomatically as possible. I don't want to confront him with the likelihood that he sold me a fake coin, but rather just tell him I'm having second thoughts and would like to trade it back to him. Of course we didn't discuss any return priveleges at the time of sale, so I'll be at his mercy.

[awb]

And Happy Birthday, Rey!

[stev32k]

There are several indicators of a counterfeit. Compare the cast counterfeit below with your coin. Notice the surface roughness and especially the edges of the rims. Counterfeits almost always have rough rims whereas rims on real coins are worn smooth.

 

One indicator that cannot be seen in a photo is the obverse / reverse orientation. On genuine U.S. coins the up-side of the obverse and reverse are 180 degrees apart. On over 200 trade dollar counterfeits I've examined only two or three had the correct orientation.

 

Another strong indicator is the lack of detail in the wheat stalks directly behind liberty. This is a low area of the design and the last place to show wear, but for some reason the counterfeits are almost never well struck in this area whereas the detail is very visible on real coiins.

 

 

 

For comparison here is a genuine, but well worn (VF20) TD. Notice the rims and the detail behind liberty.

 

[EZ_E]

 

The next coin show is in two weeks, and I expect to see the dealer I bought the coin from there. I'd like to return the coin to him, in trade for something else, since he'd be less likely to hand me cash back. I'm trying to figure out how to handle the situation as diplomatically as possible. I don't want to confront him with the likelihood that he sold me a fake coin, but rather just tell him I'm having second thoughts and would like to trade it back to him. Of course we didn't discuss any return priveleges at the time of sale, so I'll be at his mercy.

 

I would print out this entire thread and take it to the show as "backup". Be diplomatic but tell him that enough doubt was place upon the authentication of the coin that you no longer feel comfortable with it and would like a trade.

 

If he refuses to deal with you then report him to the ANA and "out" him on this forum.

 

p.s. Even if this was an authentic coin, it still stinks. You should seek an original, undipped example similar to TomB's. Never settle for junk coins.

[awb]

One indicator that cannot be seen in a photo is the obverse / reverse orientation. On genuine U.S. coins the up-side of the obverse and reverse are 180 degrees apart. On over 200 trade dollar counterfeits I've examined only two or three had the correct orientation.

The reverse/obverse are in the correct orientation. (I'd be really upset with myself if I missed that!) Are the fakes you refer to struck like medals (0 degrees rotation), or do you mean the rotation is only slightly off?

 

 

I would print out this entire thread and take it to the show as "backup". Be diplomatic but tell him that enough doubt was place upon the authentication of the coin that you no longer feel comfortable with it and would like a trade.

I'd rather not accuse him of being a cheat without knowing for certain. Even if I took a loss, I'd prefer to maintain goodwill, even if I never do business with him again.

 

 

p.s. Even if this was an authentic coin, it still stinks. You should seek an original, undipped example similar to TomB's. Never settle for junk coins.

Thank you for the good advice.

[construct]

The trouble with giving no indication of doubt about authenticity is that he might just resell it to someone else. If this thread is not enough to convince you thoroughly, you could still say that trade dollars are scary and that there is enough doubt in your mind that you'd like to exchange it for something else. If he isn't convinced it's counterfeit, he should be okay with making an exchange.

[awb]

UPDATE

 

The coin show was this weekend, so I brought the trade dollar with me. The one dealer I showed it to said it was fake, pointing out many of the same comments posted here. He also said the chop marks weren't actual Chinese marks.

 

So I took the coin back to the dealer I bought it from. He was grinning ear to ear since he had just made a sale to another dealer known for being slow to part with his cash, so I caught him at the perfect time. I reminded him that I had bought the coin at the last show from him and told him that I had shown it around and I was having second thoughts, and asked if he would take it back in trade for something else. He said yes with virtually no hesitation. I was immediately happy and relieved that this error of mine wasn't going to cost me much.

 

I left with the bust half dollar below, my first one. If this one turns out to be fake, I'll have to change hobbies!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[construct]

Very nice for a first CBH. I like the toning. Congratulations.

[rbrown4]

Good deal, glad you are happy with the exchange and it is refreshing to know that the dealer took the Trade Dollar back.

 

Rey

[EZ_E]

I like your new deal better. This has been a great thread and very informative to me.

 

I had purchased a PR64 cameo trade dollar last month but sent it back for some nasty blemishes. I picked this one up on the marketplace as a replacement. There is a huge difference in the price of the two but I'm more happy with the $150 model, I believe. (thumbs u

 

[RGT]

Vic, I like your new Trade better also and it looks more like an XF to me, but what do I know. I need one like that for my Dansco.

[bsshog40]

I like both of those trade dollars. Nice Victor!!

[Tradedollarnut]

Honestly? If I was going to select a single example of a trade dollar, there's no way I'd buy an 1877 with an even weaker strike than usual for the date. Normally, I'm not a strike weenie but that 1877 is a flat as a pancake on the stars and head.