Better than average counterfeit 1914 D Cent

The biggest clue you have that it is not an authentic 1914 D is that the D mintmark is NOT the type that is on a 1914-D. A genuine 1914 D has serifs in the mintmark, as well as a triangular shape in the opening within the D. Your mintmark is very similar to that that would be on an altered 1944 cent, but the spacing between the 9 and the altered 4 is a bit smaller than I would expect it to be if it was just an altered cent; but it is still more, IMO, than that on an authentic one. Unless the altered cent was done in a much better fashion, moving the material in the first 4 to be more "centered" so to speak. In otherwords, the space between the right side of the first 1 and the left of the 9 should be about the same (not significantly more) than the space between the right of the 9 and the left of the second 1. Also, it seems that the 9 is more in line with one of a 1944 D cent than a 1914 D.


IMO, if it is labeled by experts who have handled it as "questionable" instead of "fake" it would be because they can't detect the way it was altered or faked, but that it still doesn't fit with what an authentic one would look like.


You must learn the exact look of a 1914-D mintmark. It will be your best clue in telling if one is likely to be authentic or not. If the mintmarks do not match with the known style for that year and mint, then it most likely will never be able to be certified as real.

Here's your's (on the left) and a real one (I took the pic from what Snaz posted on his thread http://www.cointalk.com/t76229/ in 2009, where he put up real ones from Heritage for comparison) on the right. You should be able to see the serifs clearly as well as the other characteristics I talked about --- the triangular shape within the mintmark and the shapes of the 9 in the date.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

As noted;

 

Good to know, rlm's cents. I'll stand corrected on that, then.

 

Yeah, what Lance said.......don't need no 2AM knocks on the door.

 

Very much possible they used the fine needle trick.
Bore a small hole in the edge and then using other equipment they can manipulate the surface of the coin, and create figures, MMs or alter them. Common on non-reeded edge coins Highly deceptive, since these are typically done by the best of counterfeiters, they can leave practically no marks or indication on the edge after their repair work. the coin is then usually "circulated" only issue is that many times, since the damage is irreversible, if they mess up they can not undo what they've done, case in point the example matt has posted, has that look, wrong shape of mm notice the two different styles and they tried to correct it but were unable to do so.
Regardless Matt I would keep this, chalk it up as a lesson and to educate others, few counterfeiters stay in business for long, and this guy was an exception IMO, those that do, usually leave the scene years before their forgeries are discovered...

 

Since on the subject of fake 1914-D, I have always wondered about this one. I bought it a few years back and have looked as close as I can to see if it is fake or real. Should I send it in for grading or keep it raw if you guys determine it to be the real thing? Thanks

 

Your pictures are not large enough for a detailed analysis, but I see nothing to say it is fake. Was there something specific that concerned you?

As for slabbing, that is pretty much up to you. However, if you are planning to sell it or to pass it on to you heirs, definitely slab it.

 

Paranoia. I read all about the fakes and I wonder. I would grade the coin between G and VG. Got $105 invested in it. Having it sent off would remove the guesswork even if it came back "genuine". Guess I am looking for an opinion before I submit. I am thinking about sending in a few others for grading. Almost all are raw, and ye,s I am planning to pass a few on and don't want them to have to worry about that issue. Blew up the original photo a bit to see if more details are helpful.

 

I would be pretty sure it would be good and likely details from the looks of those fields.

 

I agree with Rlm's judgment.

 

G4 details, old cleaning

A close-up of the date/MM would help in authentication....but I see nothing that alarms me.

 

I like these types of threads for educational purposes. Knowledge is power. Looking at the real and fake, the fake D mintmark is definitely tampered with.

 

I've come back to this thread several times today - it is a really GOOD counterfeit. Like most of you have already said, it just doesn't look right. I finally pulled out a PCGS Counterfeit Booklet I got at the ANA Summer Session course a couple years ago and there it was - a large color print of a duplicate to this one. I mean another "work of art" by the same person. PCGS has a '14-D just like this one in their permenant library of counterfeits. Like Lance and rlm pointed out - it's the serifs on the D.

 

Better than the average 1944-d modified into a 1914-d, yes. Truly deceptive, not hardly. As has been pointed out, there's way too much detail on Lincoln and the mint mark is all wrong.

I do wonder if the mintmark was added/embossed or if this is a die struck counterfeit. I suspect the latter, but does anyone know?

 

How many dies did they use for the obverse rlm ?

 

Not really sure. I heard 6 a long time ago. I have seen statistics for someone trying to assemble a pictorial record and he only found 5. I have seen a mint report that I read to say there were 10 if I can read it right (don't bet on this).

 

It's a 1914 with an added MM.

 

Some day , just for the heck of it, I am going to try and remove some mint marks intact, just to take some photos.

 

Just curious, but what are you planning to use to do this? The only way aside from lasers and computer controlled cutters (if such exists with that fine a control) I could think of would be to grind away the coin to leave the MM. That is an oversimplification, but that would be the general idea.

 

I don't know for sure where I would get them, but I once saw a photo series where they used small gravures ( engraving tools) one shaped like very miniature snow shovels ( flat) and a tapper tool to "push" the shovel under the mm, cutting it away, putting it on a leather flat and cleaned out the inner areas of the mm with tiny stylus tools. They didn't worry about the donor coin, just the little piece. Luckily copper is a soft metal, I am sure CuNi would be a greater problem, and I think using a clad cent would be frustrating and much much harder.