I recently purchased a 1908-D No Motto St. Gaudens double eagle in Japan. When I looked at it under standard show lighting, it seemed like it had some toning problems, and I thought that is why the dealer offered it to me at the bullion price. However, when I got home, I found that the obverse had a strange tint to it, a sort of silvery bluish tint when seen from a certain angle under a different kind of light, while the reverse was dark and streaked in several places. Under incandescent lighting, the obverse does not seem so discolored. I took the coin to another dealer for a second opinion, and was told that its strike looked better than the strike of a 1908-P No Motto St. Gaudens double eagle I have that has beautiful golden orange surfaces and which I know is genuine. He also said that the seams on the edge of the suspicious coin appeared normal, and that the weight was the standard 33.43 grams. I did a ring test at home with my son, who has perfect pitch, and he told me that both coins have a pitch that is between a very high B and C, although the Philadelphia coin has a slightly higher pitch. This is the first time I have seen a US gold coin with such coloration issues. Did the Denver Mint just have lousy planchets that year? Or is this coin like the proverbial 3-dollar bill?
Photos would help. What you are describing could be PVC damage. But I would have expected the dealer to be able to spot PVC damage so maybe that's not what it is. What seams are you talking about? A genuine coin does not have seams. A counterfeit coin may have seams (e.g., where the dies of a cast counterfeit meet or where the two halves of an electrotype counterfeit are joined). I have never heard anyone compare a coin's ring to musical notes. I have no idea what a high B or C sounds like because I have absolutely no musical proclivity whatsoever. I can, however, tell when a coin does not ring the same as another.
Thank you for your reply. What I refer to as "seams" are the raised lines that separate stars from letters (or one star from another) on the lettered edge. The coin itself is struck, with a shine that looks like typical mint luster. Surfaces are fairly smooth, but with a bit of roughness under Liberty's right arm. I will try to include scanned images once I get access to a scanner and learn how to post them.
Photos of questionable 1908-D Double Eagle Here are some scans of the questionable double eagle. I should also mention that the die alignment seems to be about 7 degrees off.
So, is this coin suffering from PCV damage, or is it of questionable metallic content? Is there any way to tell? And has anyone heard of a die alignment on a St. Gaudens double eagle being off by 7% or so?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the "seems" you mention here are due to the collar during the striking process. My st. gaudens liberty and indians all have 3 straight lines about 120 degrees from each other along the edge. Also, if the weight and size are correct, the metallic compound is likely pretty close. I don't see anything off hand to indicate that this coin is a counterfeit, but you should wait until the experts chime in.
The coin does have a strange look to it but would need better pics to offer an opinion. PVC would do virtually nothing to gold, and die alignment off 15 deg. or less is considered to be within tolerance by the mint.
I will try to post more pics from different angles later today or tomorrow. I should add that the dark streaks on the back don't "dip out" and in fact look uglier when they are in a mild dipping solution.
Yes, that is what I am referring to as "seams". If this is not the correct English numismatic term, then I would be much obliged if someone could tell what these collar lines are called
Here are some more pics (scans), taken with the coin aligned at different angles to the scanner light. I hope they help.
Must admit have never seen one so darkly colored, nor can I imagine what could cause it. But I can't really see anything to make me decide one way or the other if it is genuine. Sorry.
hmm. well I have several gold coins with "orange peel" toning, but it is usually more evenly spread and more orange looking than this particular one. It has to do with the toning of the copper that is mixed with the gold. Your coin is unusual, but I still believe it is authentic. I just don't see the point of counterfeiting a common date Saint with gold. If you have a loupe, you can examine it closely for raised lines/tooling marks(which is a sign of a counterfeit).
I would bring the coin to your local B&M and have them take a look at it. Judging these coins from low-resolution photos is a crapshoot -- and some of the counterfeits of this series are very difficult to spot.
I can think of three reasons for counterfeiting a common date Saint-- 1) It wouldn't get the same kind of scrutiny that a key date would get. 2) Even common dates are currently commanding a hefty premium over the gold content. 3) Making a fake with less than 90% gold could still net a nice profit for the counterfeiter, even if the coin is sold for "melt".
You are correct. There is a payoff, and lots of common US gold coins have been counterfeited. It's just the cost/benefit ratio of making one of that high quality seems meager. If the weight is correct, and the dimensions are correct; it should be pretty darn close to 90%, unless they used platinum or another one of those rare dense metals to combine with the gold. If it rings, than it is likely not cast. I'm not an expert, but I've had experience with fake us gold and am thinking out loud. Another thing we haven't really discussed is the luster. With the detail remaining on the coin, there should be sufficient cartwheel affect under the light unless the surfaces have been messed with. All this to say, it still could be fake. If it doesn't look right, there may be a reason. I missed the part where the owner sold it at melt, so that could be a warning sign. Heed leadfoots advice, or send it out for certification if you can.
There has been a lot of discussion in AboutCoins and elsewhere about Chinese counterfeits. A Chinese counterfeiter who cuts a 90% gold fineness to even 85% can make $50 from the difference, a significant amount in a country where factory workers get $200-300 a month.
I was assuming that the melt price was taking into account the "ugly" factor, and that the dealer probably had less than the asking price invested in it, since it could have easily been bought when the Japanese yen was high and the dollar-based gold price was relatively low. Also, a few Japanese dealers will occasionally sell some American gold at melt if they can still make a profit on it. For example, I bought some $10 Indians at one show for little more than melt, and one of them ended up being slabbed as an MS-61. All the others were slabbed at slightly lower grades, but they were all genuine.
i wish i could go morgan hunting i might get a rare morgan for like 40 bucks but then again ti might be counterfeit
The problem with Morgans here is not with counterfeit ones, but with overpricing. They seem to be about the most popular American coin over here (Japan), and it would be a lucky find indeed to get a decent one for less than the average US price (since most of the dealers here seem to get theirs from the US). I've seen CC dollars in GSA boxes, for example, go for $250 or more. The deal with American gold here is, the $10 Indians and $20 pieces were selling like hotcakes several years ago because there was a gold coin jewelry mania that coincided with Japan's rising economic power. I was told that office ladies were paying up to 120,000 yen each for a $10 Indian in a bezel, and so Japan was importing lots of those coins from US dealers. But the coin jewelry bubble burst, and the office ladies got tired of their coins and dumped them at a low price. Today, you can get a $10 Indian at a show for around half the price of the bubble peak.
