Missing Morgan VAM? 0

[EagleRJO]

I was looking at the attached raw 1880-CC Morgan Reverse of 79 (close to Fine condition) with a mint mark that doesn't seem to match any of the varieties on the VAM World site (www.vamworld.com/wiki/1880-CC_VAMs).

However, I did see a certified F-12 on PCGS CoinFacts which I was using for the grade and overall appearance that looks like a pretty close match, including the mark which is probably a "Large CC" tilted left slightly. I think the closest one is a VAM-9, but the mark is farther away from the "DO" of dollar so that VAM isn't a match. VAM-3 is also close, but the posted coins appear to have a mark tilted left slightly more.

VAM World lists VAM-3 thru VAM-10 with none of them matching either one. Are they missing a VAM with a Large CC mark? Also, I see a note below the VAM World list indicating that there was a past VAM-1 described as "Slanted Arrow Feathers, Large CC (Does Not Exist)". Was the CoinFacts F-12 slabbed before that VAM was removed, possibly as not being a legit coin?

Edited October 18, 2022 by EagleRJO

[RWB]

Possibly. Post on the VAMworld.com site and see what members say.

Edited October 10, 2022 by RWB

[J P M]

There are probably many Mogen's out there that have never been to VAMworld . With all the Morgans with cracks in them the mints must have gone through a lot of dies from 1878 to 1921

[EagleRJO]

I agree JP, even though there are a limited number of dies for any year/mark. I have come across a number of Morgans that looked completely legit (matching details, shapes, fonts, locations, spacing, alignment, etc.) but with a date or mark that varied from listed VAMs as those are hand punched in the dies. Some I have posted or seen here with ppl thinking it may be a new variety and others possibly being a counterfeit.

I always pass on those and will leave it up to the variety enthusiasts to take a chance on submitting them. But this is the first time I have come across a date/mark that didn't match a known variety where there was a matching certified example by one of the big boys.

I was thinking of posting this to the VAM site like RWB suggested but wanted to post it here first so hopefully someone, maybe with the VAM book, could check what I'm seeing. And I am curious about what they mean by a VAM-1 (which is typically the normal die and may be a match for these from the description) "Does Not Exist".

Edited October 12, 2022 by EagleRJO

[Sandon]

   My VAM book (third edition from 1991) lists the same ten numbers as VAMWORLD, with VAM 1 (normal slanted arrow feather large CC) and VAM 2 (normal parallel arrow feather with small CC) already said not to exist because all known coins were varieties.  (I think that Van Allen and Mallis always reserved the first numbers for "normal dies" for any pieces that weren't easily distinguishable from others, which could have included a number of different die pairs with slightly different date and/or mint mark positions.)  

   I think that your photos may be of a VAM 3.  The date and mint mark positions appear to match, although it's hard to tell when you can't compare them side to side. (I have to switch between screens.)  The low quality of the photos of the coin in question and the wear and dirt on the coin make the diagnostics, such as die polish marks, the dash under the second "8" and the slight doubling on the first "8" and the "0" impossible to see.  You would need to have the actual coin for examination to confirm that it is an unlisted die variety.

   Most serious collectors seek and study 1880-CCs in uncirculated grades, as most existing pieces are uncirculated from the GSA hoard (over 131,000 pieces) or earlier releases of mint bags in 1938 and 1955 believed by Q. David Bowers to have totaled around 100,000 pieces.  (Source: his Silver and Trade Dollars of the United States: A Complete Encyclopedia, Volume 2 at 2299 (1991).)  Therefore, it's possible, though not likely, that there are unknown die varieties of this lower mintage issue among well circulated coins.

[EagleRJO]

Thanks for looking at your VAM book Sandon and confirming the known varieties. I did look at the VAM-3. It's close, but enlarging and overlaying the marks so that I could switch quickly to directly compare them revealed that the posted coins have a CC mark tilted to the left slightly compared to that VAM.

I am going to pass on this one as I am not at least finding a match with a known variety, but just out of curiosity I may post to the VamWorld site since I did find that certified example match.

[It is also rubbing my funny bone that there is no VAM-1 normal die, but there is a description.]

Edited October 12, 2022 by EagleRJO

[Oldhoopster]

@messydesk runs VamWorld.  I've seen him here occasionally but he usually is on the other boards.  He's a very helpful guy

 

[pigeonman333rd]

I recently purchased a 1893 s morgan silver dollar for $3100 and I would like to know if it looks genuine or does it look like a fake coin. I posted some pictures down below.

[J P M]

 

On 10/17/2022 at 3:42 AM, pigeonman333rd said:

I recently purchased a 1893 s morgan silver dollar for $3100 and I would like to know if it looks genuine or does it look like a fake coin. I posted some pictures down below.

Your pictures are to far away to tell anything about the coin. Sorry 

[messydesk]

The 1880-CC looks like VAM 3.  Wear and crud can mess with perceived mint mark position.  VAM 1 was marked as non-existent probably in the 1976 edition of the VAM book (definitely in the 1992 edition).  That was meant to be a placeholder if there were such thing as a normal dies 80-CC when Leroy Van Allen started cataloging these.

The 1893-S looks fake from here. The date looks wrong and the combination of wear and coloring look typical of a lot of fakes.

[RWB]

On 10/17/2022 at 3:42 AM, pigeonman333rd said:

I recently purchased a 1893 s morgan silver dollar for $3100 and I would like to know if it looks genuine or does it look like a fake coin. I posted some pictures down below.

High probability of being a counterfeit. Post better photos, including details of mintmark, date and word LIBERTY. [Consider getting your money back and reporting the seller to the FBI.]

[Sandon]

   @pigeonman333rd--NGC has the 1893-S Morgan dollar as #10 on its list of 50 most frequently counterfeited or altered U.S. coins!  While thousands of genuine pieces exist, their high value has led to the creation of many thousands of added mintmarks, altered dates, and outright counterfeits.  Go to 10. 1893-S Morgan Dollar | NGC (ngccoin.com)  (right click to open) for photos of the diagnostics of genuine pieces, including the die lumps in the "R" and die scratch in the "T" of "LIBERTY" and the mintmark shape and position. The "3" in the date on genuine pieces is also slightly higher than the other numbers, and it appears to be level or lower on your piece.  

   Respectfully, if you purchase coins at this price level and aren't very familiar with authenticating and grading them, you should only buy pieces certified by reputable grading services such as ANACS, NGC, or PCGS or at least buy them from well-established, reputable dealers such as Professional Numismatists Guild (PNG) members.  (It would also be better to post inquiries about your coins as new postings.)

  

[EagleRJO]

@pigeonman333rdRight off the bat the date on that 1893-S Morgan is off as noted by messydesk and Sandon compared to the date on a genuine 1893-S coin attached (there was only one obverse die used for the two legit VAMs), so there is no reason to post better pics or dig into die markers. The numbers are misshapen, not aligned the same and more importantly the date is too close to the neckline of the portrait.

Note that on the legit coin below the left side base of the "1" lines up with the right side of denticle #3 from the neckline point, but the coin you posted lines up with the left side of denticle #3. It is referred to as a "Near Date" counterfeit which you can see at the following link if you scroll down a bit to that heading ... www.vamworld.com/wiki/1893-S_Fake_Gallery.

Hopefully you can get a refund from wherever you purchased the coin as not being what it was represented to be.

Edited October 18, 2022 by EagleRJO

[EagleRJO]

On 10/17/2022 at 10:52 AM, messydesk said:

The 1880-CC looks like VAM 3.  Wear and crud can mess with perceived mint mark position.

You may be right that grime, wear and a hit to the coin just make it appear to be misshapen and off. Thanks.

[pigeonman333rd]

The coin shop went out of business and I kinda see why. So I can't get a refund

 

[Coinbuf]

On 10/17/2022 at 3:13 PM, pigeonman333rd said:

The coin shop went out of business and I kinda see why. So I can't get a refund

 

Sorry to say that you have an expensive paperweight, knowledge is important when spending hard earned money.

[pigeonman333rd]

I first tried to contact the seller. The website says that the seller is no longer a seller then I went to file a report on the website and it wouldn't except it. So I filed a report with the Federal Trade Commission.