Thought I’d share some of my contemporary counterfeits. The deceptiveness that goes along with them intrigues me. Feel free to post your examples.
Both of these are cast forgeries of ancient Roman coins. The Titus is an ok fake, but has some obvious telltale signs of it being a cast. The Septimius Severus is much less convincing. However, I spotted the Titus as a forgery first, namely because I overlooked the obvious signs S. Severus was a forgery because I refused to believe someone would bother to forge a $35 coin.
I own this 1916-D Merc that is a contemporary counterfeit. The D was added. Actually was done quite well too except the position is a bit wrong.
Good idea to start a thread on contemporary counterfeits. I’ll post pictures of my 1896 micro-O Morgan tomorrow...
I’d call it a genuine coin with added mint mark, but that’s a technicality. How do you know WHEN it was done?
I got the coin early 1980’s from the same dealer I purchased my genuine 16-D. He had it since the 1970’s and it came from a deceased long time collector whose family liquidated the collection to him... When I look at the added D through a loupe it shows wear. Whoever added the D carried it in their pocket for a while...... Fact is though. I cannot confirm it prior to the early 1980’s and had always believed it was an early forgery. Just my feel is all really.
As promised - my first 1896-O micro O contemporary counterfeit: It should be VAM-4... maybe somebody can confirm?
Interesting question. I guess it depends on when each variety/date was made. Those in the 60s maybe not so much as the ones in the 1910s. "After examining the group of coins, it became apparent that these Morgan dollars were not struck in the New Orleans Mint in the years indicated by their dates. In fact, they were not struck in the mint at any time. These coins are among the most deceptive copies of United States coins seen. It is probable that they date to the early part of the twentieth century, but may have been struck as late as the 1940's. They have been known to numismatists since at least the mid-1960s." https://www.pcgs.com/news/pcgs-announces-contemporary-counterfeit-status-of-1896-o-1900-o
I don’t know. PCGS called them contemporary. They argue the silver spot price was so low, that the counterfeiters must have made a tremendous amount of money at the time. The link @CoinBreaux posted was my primary source of information when I bought this counterfeit.
Here is a thread I made awhile back. Lots of examples there. https://www.cointalk.com/threads/contemporary-counterfeits.284893/
