1877 IHC fake?

What is it that makes me suspicious about this 1877? It just doesn't seem right, but I am no counterfeit expert. What is with the action around the date? I am not buying it, just tracking pricing, and it stuck out as funny looking to me.

http://cgi.ebay.com/1877-INDIAN-HEAD-CENT-HIGH-GRADE-MEGA-RARE-KEY-DATE_W0QQitemZ380114994481QQihZ025QQcategoryZ41086QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Something with the date is bothering me. Lot of rubbing in that area.

 

Rule #1: If you have to ask: "Is this a fake?" 99.9% you have already answered your own question.

Rule #2: When in doubt, pass.

Rule #3: If you are not sure, pass.

Rule #4: If you are not sure: ask CT.

 

Yea, and if you look at the date the two 7's look like totally different types, it also looks misaligned. I think someone repunched the date. The rest of the coin looks too grainy to me too, could be porosity but just odd.

 

Yea, I figured, but I am learing how to spot them for my education, I am not considering buying this one. I wanted to see if my suspicions were correct and why so I can identify it in the future.

 

Good catch. Kind of interesting to see how much people will pay for an obvious counterfeit like that. Someone needs to teach that seller that if you are going to remove a date and glue on some numbers (77 in this case), you need to darken the area around it so it doesn't look like a set of cutleries got to it (even though that is probably similar to what happened).

 

Lot o' jing for a questionable coin......

 

it also has the "weak N" which I don't have my book with me, but I don't think 1877 had the "weak N" problem, that was another date. here is a good example of a 1877, it sure looks different.

 

I guess, but it looks pretty screwed up around the date.

 

Is that what happened? Looks like it, how would they get the "7" to glue on there? Fashion one? Shave it off another coin somehow? Anyone have their cherry pickers handy to see what year was the weak N? And if it was more than one year?

 

Oh yea, and no returns on this item either!

 

Exact-a-Mundo......

 

Alright maybe not glue...

but they probably took an 1897 or 1887 or 187? and sanded off the respective number and welded a 7 from another coin on there. Definitely fake IMO.

 

OK I found it "The bottom part of the N of ONE is also seen weak on some business strikes from the hub used from 1864 to 1870 and again in 1877, which had this letter weakly impressed." So they knew enough to have a weak N for it, so probably used an 1870 and modified the 0 to a 7 huh? But they didn't know enough to tone it back up? Sheesh. Shame cause it would have been a nice 1870 if it was original and genuine. The rest of the coin still looks fishy to me though. Kind of unnatural.

 

this one looks goofy too, I have never seen an IHC that had as much facial detail as this one does but have an obliterated rim and legend, everyone I have seen that had the rim and legend gone you could just barely see the outline of the head, not the lips and eye. and the rim on the reverse is pretty complete. I haven't seen that before either. Great, now I am never going to get my 1877 cause I am going to think every one of them is fake!

http://cgi.ebay.com/Key-date-1877-I...ryZ41085QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

 

From the wear on the front and not the back I wonder if it was dug maybe a coin sandwiched with another coin. It has a scratch on the face . Ice

 

These are why I follow one simple rule: Never buy a coin over fifty buck on ebay.

 

Woof, Woof......

 

I would absolutely insist on certification on this kind of purchase. PCGS, NGC or ANACS. I wouldnt even look at anything raw. I totally agree that the original ebay listing looks very very fishy.