Is this 1937-D 3 legger genuine or created by someone?

[BankNote1]

I found this 1937-D 3 leg Buffalo Nickel on eBay and thought it looked funny. I e-mailed the seller and he said it was genuine. He had purchased it from a friend that wouldn't mess over him!

I still think there is something wrong with it. Looking at the leg area it is dark and just doesn't look right. I just wondered what the board thinks!

 

1937-D 3 leg

[GoYankees]

This web page might help...

 

http://www.coinsite.com/content/faq/1937d3leg.asp

[spiny]

I wouldn't touch it from what I see in the picture. The rear leg looks messed with, not eroded. I don't see the erosion on the indian's neck, and the mintmark position looks slightly SE from where it should be. It could just be the picture, though...

[Hoot]

It's phony.

 

A genuine 37-D 3-legger was struck from very fatigued dies. One of the most important markers is the neck of the Indian. The neck has a "moth eaten" look, even in the least die fatigued specimens. Also, the temple and central hair areas of the Indian have a strong granularity that is evident in all but the most worn specimens (i.e. g4 or less). On the reverse, the rear-most leg of the bison also has the "moth eaten" appearance. (On the specimen you are showing it looks tooled.) There is also a series of raised dots and dashes (small die gouges) forming a pis$ trail from the bison's unit (really, the first hind leg) to the raised ground behind the rear-most front leg. E PLURIBUS UNUM is quite weak in a genuine piece and there are evident die fatigue lines around the rims, which would show in a coin of the condition that you have shown.

 

Here's a picture of a genuine piece, MS62. Bear in mind that the markers that I've spoken of will show on circulated pieces.

 

 

Hoot

[GoYankees]

Thanks Hoot,

 

I learn something new everyday.

 

I noticed that the eBay item is no longer for sale.