1856 Flying Eagle

[cdecredico-migration]

Hello,

I am new here. I have ab 1856 Flying Eagle that have been in my family since the 1920's. My grandfather collected and this is one of the odd pieces he had. I showed it to a well known auction house and I was told it is a replica. They said it was because, "The details are extremely weak and muddy, and the color looks a bit off." Would like some feedback. I would say it is good to very good.

Thank you,

Cesare

 

(The image attached is the original image I sent. I will post a new photo I took that I think is a little better.)

[cdecredico-migration]

Here is the other photo.

[cdecredico-migration]

Why are my photo's not appearing? Can someone help? They are the required size.

[Bruceswar]

here is your photo...

 

[Bruceswar]

The coin looks cleaned, but I cannot tell you if it real or not.

[JKK]

I'm not very sophisticated at this, but that 6 in the date looks eerily like it was born an 8. Could this be a cast counterfeit as well? It has that sort of washed-out detail effect that Scott Travers' book associates with those.

[bsshog40]

By looking at the pic, the bottom of the letters in america are worn or not well struck. If I'm not mistaken, the eagles wings would be a higher relief here. This would lead me to believe the possibility of a fake coin. I'm not an expert at these, so maybe someone with more knowledge can help out. Welcome to the board!

[rbrown4]

Here is a picture of an 1857 that I have. It is cleaned and I would say that yours is cleaned as well in addition to being worn considerable in areas. As far as being real or not, as Bobby and others indicate I would have to rely on the opinions of others that know this coin better. Just thought this picture would help with some comparisons. I agree the 6 looks funny as does the 1. I also can not determine for sure if the Eagles Head is somewhat not right in proportion.

 

The other things I notice is that I think I am correct in that on the 1856 the O in OF has a more rectangular inner area as opposed to the more oval shape on the 1857. Also the Serifs on the E and F are more elongated on the 1856 extending down further than on the 1857.

 

It will be interesting to find out.

 

Rey

[ldhair]

It's hard to tell much from the image.

Try to attach the second one like you did the first.

 

I'm looking at the "O" in OF. It looks D shaped. This look came in 1857 and 58. The inside of the O should be almost rectangular on the 1856.

[TomB]

That doesn't look like an authentic 1856 to me. If you are concerned you may send it to NGC or PCGS for a relatively small price, about $30 or so plus shipping, and they will give you a definitive answer.

[jesbroken]

Here is a comparison photo of the real coin and the one in question.Odd that someone trying to counterfeit a coin would make so many errors but go figure.

The 6's are definitely different as are several things leading to a fake, but it is interesting in several aspects of a weak strike rather than wear. It does also have a cast look to it.I believe I would have someone with great knowledge such as Rick Snow see this coin.

Good Luck.

[MorganMan]

Sorry to say, but that sure looks like a fake casting to me. The Denticles are not correct, and the 6 in the date looks to be recut by a not so good engraver. Looks like to me someone copied an 1857 or 1858, then recut the date on the mold....

 

sorry

 

MM

[James_OldeTowne]

It is not a genuine 1856 Flyer. I think it's struck with fake dies, and not a cast, reminiscent of Chinese fake coins. I'll bet it's "greasy" to the touch, too.

[just carl]

Difficult to really tell from that photo but even the lettering appears to be a slight difference away from the edge. It is odd though that anyone way, way back then would bother counterfeiting a coin that would hardly bring more than a few cents back then. Not a lot of coin colletors, books on coin values, etc. Even when I was a kid back in the 30's there wasn't much info on coin collecting.

[lkenefic]

I'm not so certain this is a cast copy, but it is definitely not a real '56 Flyer. The stylized "5" in the date was particular to the '56...and moreover...the "6" appears to have been produced from an "8". Also, the higher relief in the wing detail and [as someone else mentioned] the denticles are wrong for this issue. This, along with the 1877 IHC are some of the more common targets of counterfieters for early small cent issues.

 

Leo

[relicsncoins]

I think it's a harshly cleaned 58 that was altered to look like a 56.

 

JJ

[cdecredico-migration]

Well jesbroken, I emailed Rick Snow and it is an altered LL 1858. To bad it has been altered, don't think there is much value to it now. Such is life.

[James_OldeTowne]

I bet if you list it on eBay as an altered coin, you'll get at least $30 for it. But the ethics of doing that might be questionable. There IS a legitimate market for such altered coins, for people forming reference collections of altered and counterfeit coins.

[cdecredico-migration]

Well as long as I list it properly, I don't see anything questionalble about it.