Pretty good fake for everyone to study

TPG's do make mistakes. So what happens when they come to the opinion that a coin is fake and it really isn't. "On reexamination it turns out this coin is genuine, sorry about that big C stamped on it."

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Look at this phoney coin over fake

 

Thanks for sharing. And pointing out the telltale L I'm not an ihc expert by any means and this could easily got by me. I'll have to keep a lookout for these too the cert fees are a cheap education!

 

This would be an excellent "Guess the Grade" to see how many people can pick it out as a counterfeit and real. Honestly, I would have gotten dooped, and I'm sure 95% of us would have if it was in hand. The pictures and the fact that we now know its counterfeit have us looking for the tiny flaws in the coin, but if it was in hand from a reputable dealer, I doubt most of us would notice anything odd.

 

it has the wrong reverse for a 1867

 

I'd love to see the correct reverse of 1867 to compare with this one.

 

I'll tell you, that looks really good. Now that I know it's counterfeit, there are areas that look a little too sharp, or, not as I'd expect, but I'd have blown that off, to be honest. I don't like the surfaces, though. I wouldn't have concluded it's counterfeit for that, but I'd have passed it. Ah, that's just me, and there's nothing anybody can do about it, lol.

 

I think I seem to recall the N in ONE is "weak" on these. Don't hold me to it.

 

I've heard that about the key 1877, but not any other date...

 

The 1869 I know is another one. Check them out.

EDIT: The theory I think is they're striking against the hollow cheek area on the other side. The support for the impression isn't all there. If the striking pressure is weak, it's going to show on that N.

 

I thought these always came back as Quest Authenticity not Counterfeit.

 

QUEST AUTHENTICITY is like the overarching Problem category and I think the sub categories are "altered date" "altered mintmark" & "counterfeit".

 

The reverse hub for the indian head cent from 1860 through about 1870 was the "weak N" hub. (The N is not always weak though.) Around 1871 a new reverse hub ( the strong N hub) was introduced. They didn't discard the old hub though and it was used to create reverse dies sometimes. All of the 1877 business strikes came from a single die that was made using the weak N hub. But ALL of the 1867 cents would have been made from the Weak N hub and the OP coin is from the strong N hub. The strength of the lower right corner of the N is what everyone keys on, but there are other differences. The one I look for is the upper serifs on the right upright of the N. O the weak N hubs the serifs are longer with the left serif being longer than the right one. On the strong N the serifs are short, stubby and of equal length. On the weak N hub the E of ONE also has a fairly long serif and the serifs of the N and E are close together. On the strong N they are much further apart.

Here is an 1867 cent with a weak N reverse, and a 1906 with the strong N.




And the picture from the OP so you can compare the reverse note especially the gap between the serifs of the N and E.

 

Would it be inappropriate to ask who the seller was? It sounds like he/she is someone worth dealing with. You have to respect a seller making good on raw coins.

 

Larry Lee. The co-owner of the 5th 1913 "V" Nickel as of last year.