Here is a close-up of the 31-s. This set also has the other semi-keys (besides 1909-s and 1909-s vdb) so even if the 1914-d IS fake, I don't think I got a bad deal. I don't forsee those other semi-keys being fake, though some are definitely cleaned / scratched.
I take back everything I said, the 1914-D is DEFINITELY fake... it is about 10-15% thicker than a normal cent and has very sharp edges. Even compared to a BU cent whose edges are a bit rounded. Also the color on the rim looks more artificial. Thanks everyone for helping me see the light! Now I have to figure out if the other coins are legit.
Alright, Im a relative newbie and am thinking my 1914 D is fake too but there are some things about it that match a real one. I am using measurements between the 1 9 1 4 to determine if this was a doctored 1 9 4 4, on a 1 9 4 4 the vertical legs of the 9 4 4 are center to center distance (using the right side of the 9) on a 1914d the vertical leg of the 1 and the 4 distance, centers on the middle part of the 9. Also the location of the D on this coin matches a 1914D not a 1944d. The things that trouble me are the tail of the 9 and what looks to be file work around the date. I appreciate your guys input! mlgdave
The second "1" looks to be a ground down 4. As in this was a 1944-D. Common way to counterfeit this key.
The 14D is clearly a fake--it is a 1914, with a very crudely added mintmark that looks nothing like the genuine one. I don't know enough about copper coinage to comment on the 31s.
A 1944-D with metal removed from the second 4 is an alteration, not counterfeit, as the coin is still genuine. While I get the point you were trying to make, and even though the end result is basically the same, a distinction should be made between the two.
+1 Also you can't compare one 44D mintmark location and use it to say it isn't a '44. There was more than one obverse die used and each one has a different MM location. On the 14D the 9 should be centered between the ones, on your coin it isn't.
Yea kook, I do agree with that and am familiar with that type of CF of this coin, the thing that I dont understand is how the distance between the 9 the 2nd 1 and the 4 match up with a 1914 and not a 1944, thats the thing thats NOT counterfeit able. On a 1944 the two 4's and the right side of the 9 are all equal distance apart, on the 1914 the distance between the 1 and the 4 lines up with the center of the 9. Thanks though, I do appreciate that!
Gee thanks guys, alteration is what I really meant. My mind is running faster than my typing this morning
Thanks Menace, that is the one thing I didnt look at, I was looking at the distances between the 9 4 4 and 9 1 4. BUt yes now it jumps out at me, Im still puzzled at the fact that the 9 1 4 have correct placement, but now I am satisfied its a faker! mlgdave
One tool for determining a 1944 from a 1914 is to look at the bottom of Lincoln's bust. A 1914 will have a smooth truncation (bottom), whereas the 44 will exhibit a small VDB on the bottom edge. It was put there in 1918 and all coins minted from 1909-1917 can be determined by the lack of these letters on the bust
As best I can figure, that is a 1914 Lincoln. I am at least 95% sure that date has NOT been modified. However, as Morgandude11 suggested, I have my doubts about that mint mark, although I won't go as far as he went
Sort of. The presents of a VDB will definitely indicate a 1944 Lincoln. However, these capable of modifying the date so it looks proper and also capable of modifying (removing) the VDB. And, FWIW, I do not see it on that coin and at least some of it should be visible.