Can someone Rate these coins/are they real?

Believe it or not I found this 1882 CC Morgan dollar when looking through some reject coins that my father had brought back from his banks coin sorting machine.

It's one of those "too good to be true" coins and I am questioning its validity. I do not have a scale but it measures almost exactly 1.5 inch and is identical to my other Morgan dollars in width. It has a heavy silver sound and the edging is not "copper looking" but a solid color.

IF you believe it is real can you give me an estimated rating.
- The luster appears yellow in the picture but that is mostly my lighting, however it is a little dull.
- No major nicks/scratches


The second coin is a 1898 Barber Half dollar. The F.S.W. was stamped by the original owner (so I was told). The coin looks very yellow/bronze to me and for its age it looks way too undamaged. Something about it doesn't look right but it has a dull silver sound to the metal identical to any other silver pieces I compared. It's measured at 1.2 inche diameter.
-Note the hair above the forehead is rubbed down a little as if it is an older coin that has wear. But the ridges are flawless?

Is it real? What would you rate it?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The 1882-CC doesn't look real. What is the weight? That is more important than the diameter. What are the weights in grams - compare them to what you find in the Red Book or a reliable source online.

 

@TheFinn The diameter measures just between 38-39 mm. And I don't own a scale for coins, unfortunately I'm very new to coin collecting.

 

I also don't think the dollar is real.

 

It's there a reason behind your guess? And just to be sure everyone is looking at the second picture of the Morgan dollar right? Cause I feel the barber is the very fake looking coin ha

I'm just looking into wear patterns and the 1882 cc shows flattening above the ear of the head and the chest of the eagle similar to an au58 graded Morgan. There is also wear around the brow and cheek bone.

I will weigh this tomorrow and get back the results. I'll see if I can find a local shop as well.

 

The lettering looks a little off on the CC, but I am no expert on counterfeits.

 

Now that you say that the bottom"curl" does look thin

 

What kind of bug took a bite out of the wreath leaf @ 4 o'clock on the reverse? Left wing soft and very mushy.

 

The Morgan is a counterfeit, sorry. Have a closer look obverse. The texture seems to be washed Out, the color is wrong and the face seems wrong, either.

 

You need to provide better pictures. But out of the 2x2 holder. Nice finds if they are real!

 

I don't care if that coin was owned by F. Scott Witzgerald. It's damaged.
As for the Morgan, I got a digital scale on Amazon for $8 and it's been great.
Coins, jewelry, metal detecting.

 

Some people do collect counterstamped coins. The Barber half looks genuine to me, and in good enough shape to appeal to those collectors.

 

It looks genuine to me and the value has been slashed by the damage.
The coin is a work of art. And the graffiti on it is vandalism.

 

I will buy a scale today and post better pictures if it is within a reasonable weight!

 

Just looking at the lettering in PLURIBUS with the 1882-CC the difference is obvious. The letters are much too blocky compared with an authentic coin.

 

With all these indications, even if the coin matches weight, would you still assume fraud or could these differences be due to a poor/weak strike?

 

Um, more experience with Morgans than the next five of us put together?

This is one of those which you suspect the moment you see it, simply because of the overall mushy look. There are details appropriate for a worn coin - the "expanded" letters, the lack of detail in the hair, the "rounded" look of some of the wreath leaves. There are also details appropriate for a coin which is not worn - the relative completeness of neck and chest feathers, and lack of flattening at the wingtips.

The obverse letters are in places almost a caricature of the original. Yes, given that the letters are tapered, they seem to "expand" as the coin wears, but for them to have "expanded" this much, the rest of the coin should be very worn.

If the near-unconscious impressions formed by the experience of looking at thousands of Morgans are insufficient - I understand "because I say so" isn't necessarily diagnostic to someone who lacks that - let's look at the notch cut out of the major wreath leaf underneath the second A in AMERICA. This is a "feature" which has been seen on counterfeits before....

 

Sorry I hope you understand I'm not questioning your opinions. I am very new to collecting so I want to be able to learn the things I should look for in the future if this is fake. I appreciate your feedback, I will definitely take these things into consideration when looking into other Morgan's.

 

The first "at a glance" look was a red flag for me, but being able to do that takes some time to develop. When I looked more closely, I noticed mushiness in the design and the lettering issues that robec pointed out. I suspect the weight is somewhere between 23 and 24 grams, although some fakes are closer to the correct weight now.

If you are new to this, then carry the fake with you in a 2x2 or a flip when you look at certified coins of the same date so that you can compare the features of a real coin with those of the fake you have. This will really help tune you in to the differences.

On the bright side, you didn't pay anything for this, and you had the presence of mind to seek advice from those who might know better than you. This puts you way ahead of a lot of people. Congrats on avoiding what we call "paying tuition" -- spending a lot of money on what ends up being a hard lesson to learn.

Regarding the Barber Half, it looks real to me, and a period counterstamp on an XF Barber Half does have value above melt to the right people.

 

Yea when i looked at the date, knew it immediately. The 1 is what caught my attention first.