Need some help with an 1889-cc. Is it counterfeit?

[morganhead-migration]

Hello, just bought an 1889-cc Morgan dollar, and am wondering if it is counterfeit. Weight is slightly lite at 26.37 grams. Diameter is slightly small at 1.494 in (37.95mm). The appearance of the coin is unlike any other I have, as a dull grainy appearance. There is an imperfection on the left wing upper edge, just under the "n". I paid quite a bit for this from a reputable seller, but from what I have been reading on the internet, that apparently doesn't account for much I guess.

 

Would appreciate any help, thanks....

 

 

http://members.cox.net/40plymouth/DSC_0002.JPG

[L1ncolnF4n]

What'd ya pay? ...

[morganhead-migration]

Paid $760 for it.

[physics-fan3.14]

I am no expert on Morgans, so let me preface my statements with that. However, I am suspect of this coin for several reasons.

 

1. The complete lack of low point detail is uncharacteristic of a struck coin. The low points of a coin are the high points of a die - and should thus be all there. Notice how all detail seems to disappear in the recesses of her hair? That is a known characteristic of fakes, although it is more often seen on Trade dollars.

 

2. The unnatural surfaces are also suspect. If it is genuine, then it has been dipped to death and polished beyond all recognition, and is not a coin you would want anyways.

 

3. The denticles and rims really don't look right.

[robec1347]

 

It looks way off to me, but that could be due to the scan. It almost looks like it's made out of clay ready for firing. Even if authentic, it looks heavily cleaned as is my example shown below.

 

 

[MarkFeld]

I can't tell much from the image, other than that if the coin is genuine, something has been done to it - the surfaces look to be badly cleaned or otherwise messed with. I must ask, though, if it is genuine, why would a reputable seller sell it for (seemingly) that low of a price?

[robec1347]

Reverse comparison

 

 

 

 

[morganhead-migration]

It wasn't scanned, these are photographs, with the light source to the right side of the coin. Coin was purchased in an auction, so that dictated final price.

[MarkFeld]

It wasn't scanned, these are photographs, with the light source to the right side of the coin. Coin was purchased in an auction, so that dictated final price.

Who was the "reputable seller" you alluded to in your initial post? Also, physics-fan put into words, something that I was seeing and bothered by, but unable to articulate as he did:

1. The complete lack of low point detail is uncharacteristic of a struck coin. The low points of a coin are the high points of a die - and should thus be all there. Notice how all detail seems to disappear in the recesses of her hair? That is a known characteristic of fakes, although it is more often seen on Trade dollars.

 

[morganhead-migration]

Who was the "reputable seller" you alluded to in your initial post?

 

I'm reluctant to list a seller here, or trash them otherwise until I am sure its a fake. Wouldn't be fair if its genuine. It may be possible to return it, looking into that possibility now. Appreciate the input, thanks a lot.

[MarkFeld]

Who was the "reputable seller" you alluded to in your initial post?

 

I'm reluctant to list a seller here, or trash them otherwise until I am sure its a fake. Wouldn't be fair if its genuine. It may be possible to return it, looking into that possibility now. Appreciate the input, thanks a lot.

It's certainly your choice not to disclose the name, though you haven't bashed the seller or been unfair to him. If the coin is counterfeit, any truly "reputable seller" will refund your money. And even non-reputable sellers are supposed to do the same.

[BillJones]

I think that this coin is a counterfeit. I don't like the general look of it. To my eye it's a cast copy. The relief is all wrong and the fact that the diameter comes up short is very disturbing.

 

If this is your price range, I would insist upon certification before I would consider buying it. If the seller refuses to let you get a third party opinion I'd pass, without a second thought. You would be better off with a REAL copy with the word "COPY" punched into it than this piece. You can buy those for a lot less money.

[James_OldeTowne]

I cannot see the primary diagnostic for this issue on these images, and therefore I would start out under the assumption that it is fake. However, it is either (actually) a very good fake, or it is the most heavily altered genuine 1889-CC that I've ever seen via images.

[robec1347]

I cannot see the primary diagnostic for this issue on these images,

 

What is the primary diagnostic or others if you have them handy.

[TomB]

Looks fake.

[WinstonWare]

First, welcome to the board (thumbs u Morgans are not my area of study but I've never seen a coin that looked that dead. I can hardly believe that's an image and not a scan. Is that picture true to what the coin looks like in hand?

[rrantique]

Looks fake.

 

I agree.

[just-john]

doesn't pass the just doesn't look right test .Wear just doesn't look right denticles

just doesn't look right -wear uneven and no wear in spots you would think would wear.Date and mint marks clear as a bell no wear but hair and cap very worn and no depth of detail really in the hair .I'm no expert and could be wrong I'm wrong often but it looks like a casting of a Morgan that was air brushed with sand blasting media or a copy that was make to look worn using artificial means.

[L1ncolnF4n]

john...physics you read my mind...I was a bit hesitant to say it at first, but it is not genuine, or exceptionally altered and un-slabbable. I don't know any sort of chemicals that make coins look like that. But I have seen a variety of other counterfeit dollars, as a friend of mine collects counterfeits, and that is seemingly identical to them. Lead-like coloring with just a lack of detail (in low points as someone else mentioned) even though the coin seems to be about VF-30 or so detail wise. It takes a lot to get rid of all lustre like that, so I'd say I'm 95% sure it's a counterfeit.

 

On another note...if it isn't...YOU GOT ONE HELL OF A DEAL...

 

best

-L1nc

[jgrinz]

Its a fake at least in my eye

It does NOT look right - the COLOR is wrong - Looks like verdigris ( ON SILVER ? )

Pictures are with comparison to both coins in this post.

 

The flowers buds? do not have the same details

The hairline does not touch the forehead

The hairline curl is no where close to what it supposed to look like.

As Physics said the low points should be visable and they are not in these pictures. The hair looks terrible.

 

This is my opinion and my differ from others

 

[MorganMan]

My opinion - Fake.

 

There is no way a coin depicted to have that kind of normal wear will have a rim so perfect, with no nicks or dings, and so square on the edge.

 

Also, The "M" initial on the neck looks way off. I could go on, but others have pointed out the problems.

 

 

Hope you can get a refund from the "reputable" dealer person.

 

 

[MarkFeld]

Hope you can get a refund from the "reputable" dealer.

The original poster wrote "reputable seller", not "reputable dealer" - perhaps the seller was a collector.

[jgrinz]

Hope you can get a refund from the "reputable" dealer.

The original poster wrote "reputable seller", not "reputable dealer" - perhaps the seller was a collector.

 

Why did I automatically think he said DEALER also ... Good Point

 

[MarkFeld]

Hope you can get a refund from the "reputable" dealer.

The original poster wrote "reputable seller", not "reputable dealer" - perhaps the seller was a collector.

 

Why did I automatically think he said DEALER also ... Good Point

I think it's because, rightly or wrongly, dealers are more likely than collectors to be associated with negative experiences. I wont be surprised if the seller was, in fact, a dealer - it's just that we don't know that at this point.

[michael]

well after the fact looks like a poor counterfeit to my minds eye from the photos

[michael]

also this particular coin was never made/struck on a press

[bsshog40]

I'm agreeing with everyone else here. First glance I thought fake. There are too many low relief areas that are , well, missing. I definately do not like the looks of this coin. If it is genuine, it has been harshly abused and would not be worth the money paid. JMO

[WoodenJefferson]

This NGC article mentions a 1889-CC counterfeit

 

The striations on the coin seem to run from almost north to south, while the rim sanding appears to be oriented NW to SE

 

(does this indicate rim metal, fins removed from die cast mold?)

[Frank Provasek]

Fake. Hope you can get your money back.

[morganhead-migration]

Fake. Hope you can get your money back.

 

Thanks, I hope so as well, but the "reputable" seller has not responded to any of my emails. Guess their promise of 14 day return policy may not mean anything. I'm mad now. Seller is silverdollarsales53inc, on eBay, with 2304 100% positive feedback.