It's a Jungle out there- Later Date Large Cent Counterfeits!

As I continue to try to document the "family" of counterfeits currently available on the market, both as copies and as authentic examples, I realize how difficult this is as the counterfeits continue to evolve...

I have articles on Coin Week about 2 different bust dollars, fake turban head and middle date large cents and early and middle date half cents- 6 total to date.

I call these intermediate deceptive fakes, good enough to fool many collectors not fully engaged on a specific series; struck from dies created from genuine examples and then struck with different dates to create the "family". They are "die linked" to the original and each other in all features except the date, which results in non-existent die varieties for the various dates except the original.

So, I continue to say when examining raw coins offered for sale on the internet (which never lies...) always start with attributing it!

The latest group of "families" I am working on are the later date large cents seen for sale in practically all internet selling venues.

I am going to start this "rant" with three different examples and review what is wrong with them before moving forward...

These three were all submitted to TPGs for certification; in all cases the TPG called them counterfeits!


1857 small date counterfeit- image courtesy NGC



1840 dated counterfeit- image courtesy NGC


1857 large date counterfeit- image courtesy PCGS

So, what are the pick-up points for these and are they of the same family?

Just for fun I will throw my counterfeit 1857 large date into the mix!



Correct Attribution!

So, starting with attribution we can say neither of the large date '57's are genuine! The imaged example in the center is genuine (image courtesy PCGS CoinFacts):



Date position relative to the bust and hair curls rule both end "coins" out. And there do not appear to be any repeating marks between them (hold that thought...).

Now, what about the small date 1857?

Well, not so good for it either (coin in the center genuine courtesy PCGS CoinFacts as well); I also threw in the 1840 example for comparison:


Again date position is off for the wannabe 1857. But there are some interesting similarities between the bad '57 small date, 1840, and one of the bad '57 large dates.

Comparing the three of those highlights the common features which shouldn't be for three so different "varieties"...



Comparison Obverses- "crescent chip" smoothed over on the 1840 example


Comparison reverses- common marks include the rim defect left lower border, a "divot" in the "E" of CENT (which diminishes in later strikings of the fakes) and a dent in the leaf under the "T" of CENT.


And we find various dates of this "family" of counterfeits in many various internet selling venues; some folks I know have put together an interesting date set of these.

A couple of others of the "crescent chip obverse/ divot E reverse:


So, I reached the limit of images allowed and will continue under comments...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

"Dark Side Collection" Example

OK, now what about the PCGS large date '57? Well, unfortunately from another "family"...

The common attribution points for these are the "smashed denticles obverse (named by a friend and fellow researcher) with an "under dotted O" reverse!



Image of a Friend's example

And a few family photos of this 2nd group:



As the research continues we are working to identify the actual genuine source coin varieties for both "Families"!

Best, Jack.

 

This becomes more true every day. Great work as always!!!

 

Very interesting as usual. What pops out in your final image is they all have a dot below the O in ONE and a dent in the lower right of E.

 

Thank you for keeping up the good fight.

 

Thanks for the few comments; this post seemed to die a quick death!

 

Many likes but few comments. Hopefully your work is reaching the collectors that need to see it. Study the series you collect folks. Education is the key to success...

 

Perhaps we are all in shock! Besides, after you expose another group of fakes what else can anyone add.

You and the group are doing a needed and great job keeping the Public and TPGS informed.

 

Thanks Dave; I will polish up the draft and send it to Coin Week for publish.

 

Thanks Insider! I often post here for comments prior to sending out for consideration for publish.

 

Noticed another pickup point, not sure on the 1840 but it seems close.

 

Thanks; I had noticed that on the '57's!

 

It DEFINITELY is!

It is equal to Legend saying "...don't buy that piece of---...". When Jack Young talks, people listen.

I know stuff.

 

When you have two C/F's from the same die, usually you keep some of the diagnostics to yourself so you don't help the counterfeiters improve the die. Now, in all honesty, any good counterfeiter could find every defect with his die w/o our help.

 

It is a double edged sword when it comes to counterfeit detection and educating the collecting community while potentially educating the counterfeiters as well...

 

Completely agree; I look at educating the collectors/ Hobby 1st priority although there are also physical characteristics I do not share in the articles...

 

Coin Week article: https://coinweek.com/counterfeits/its-a-jungle-out-there-later-date-large-cent-counterfeits/

 

Just listed on the internet for sale; can you see what's wrong with this one?

 

Yikes.

 

Another family member....