READ THIS! The Next Generation Of Chinese Counterfeits Have Arrived

Everything about the coin shown is entirely consistent with a genuine AU-55 grade 1934 Medium Motto Washington silver quarter, in a very late die state. Die scratches, die cracks, and "lathe marks" are very prevalent on genuine 1934 Washington quarters.

So who said the coin was fake ? Was it sent to major grading company and did it come back "questionable authenticity" ?

If anybody can prove that this coin is fake, please do so. The elemental analysis showing 0.5% aluminum could easily have been within the margin of error of the measuring device.

Until there is definite proof provided, such as two coins with exactly the same bag mark on both, or I get a chance to inspect the coin in person and change my mind, I am going to retain my opinion that the coin is genuine.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The problem with books, other than they remain static, is one has to read them, study both good and bad examples (preferably on a coin in hand), and repeat this process until we've finished the book. However, finishing the book does not equate to retaining the information long term. Statistics indicate that we retain about 10% of that information we hear or read longer than a few hours. I for one am always thinking to myself "I read something about this not long ago. I wonder where it was?"

We Americans have a disadvantage to the counterfeiters in Asia and other areas. We have way too much going on to spend much of our time reading. In fact very few American beyond high school/college age read anymore. Even when in school I only read a book when someone made me. Even in college I was a big fan of CliffsNotes; yes, I know that was a long time ago, but, CliffsNotes originally came out back about the time Edison invented the light bulb (just kidding). But seriously, our lives are so filled with demands today that we tend to prefer our information handed to us in small bits, small paragraphs, short videos and even pictures with the focus area circled in red. Sadly, very few Americans want to spend time with a book anymore, especially a book with a dull plot.

 

So basically you're saying that Americans are stupid. I guess the Chinese have no problem to make their fakes and pass them. For some reason if you bought a book on counterfeit coins I don't think you would have purchased it if you thought it was dull. The problem is, I don't care how many books you read about the counterfeits, it will always become outdated because there will always be new ones with better diagnostics that generally do not whine up in a book but on forums like this one. That's why is important when something new comes out in the way of counterfeits it's broadcasted around forums not hold the information for a select few.

 

Tool marks have been the bane of counterfeiters for a long time , especially on Mideast gold and not just Chinese fakes . They must know trying to fix the flaws just leaves a more noticeable mark , and since they're about the bottom line they seem to let it go . Knowledge is the one thing serious collectors have and forums like this are one place to get it . I'm also sure any serious counterfeiter knows what must be done to fool the tpgs and the most serious collectors , the fact that they're unwilling to take the time or foot the bill is our one advantage .

 

Was anyone watching one of the last Heritage auctions? there was a quarter that brought the highest grade. 32 D? Ms 67? well what ever year it was. it was a new example. Do you think it could have been a fake?

 

Several things scream "caution" on this. Numerous tool marks, especially above Washington's head and behind the eagle's head; the graininess of the field at the bottom of the reverse; the extra width of one of the eagle's wing feathers; the lump in the eagle's right armpit; to name just a few. Individually they might not warrant suspicion but together they rise a big red flag.

If you have a wide screen PC it's fairly easy to pick up on the differences. Do a split screen with the subject coin on one side and a picture of a known good example, e.g, from Photograde, on the other. You'll immediately see the differences.

Is this "proof" that you need? Maybe not but if you purchase an identical quarter I hope you enjoy it, secure in the knowledge that nobody proved it to be fake.

 

Here we go again. I thought we had moved passed this ability of yours to respond without reading. You must have some fuse loose to write this nonsense. Just where in my comment do I say Americans are lazy? I'm pointing out a fact that MOST do not like to use what little time they have after work, yard and family duties for a book, especially a technical one. Most regular people come home and want to unwind a bit and eat before heading to bed to try to get some sleep. So just what part of this is considered lazy? Trying to sleep? Trying to unwind? or, is it coming home from work? Or are you just above everyone and everything that doesn't permit your ability to leisurely sit back and read a book while looking down on those who don't?

My point was we Americans have a 1000 things that vie for our attention every second we are awake. After our job we come home to household chores and the wife that want some time, then we have TV, computers, computer games, bills to pay, tax returns, the corner bar, friends, grandkids, blogs, gardens, the news, the local men's group, the car, the A/C is not working, a business trip next week, the latest training required to keep our job certification, the HOA doesn't like something, and on and on. Asians have fewer things but they value books and trades, while Americans have more stuff but value an education that affords them more free time away from the job.

Most Americans barely have time to breathe and think, and yet somehow you believe those who don't want to read a book at the end of their day are lazy. Get real!!

 

Would a blacklight or something else somehow help on this in some way? I'm not sure if a blacklight or something else could determine a more recently minted coin or not versus an eighty year old coin??

I know we all laughed at "computer grading" years ago...however "computer diagnosis" of a coin to determine fakes might have to be the wave of the future.

 

You did not read before responding. I never said Americans are lazy. You're portraying them as stupid (re-read the post) and that the Chinese are some kind of super people that read everything they possibly can and have no life. Don't you know that the Chinese are watching us on this forum?!

Did you read the article in Coin World about the dealer that sold another dealer the fake 1oz coins?

 

The kind of "sky is falling" talk in this thread could potentially cause far more damage to numismatics than disclosing key diagnostics of a supposed counterfeit. The sky may indeed be falling, but nothing in this thread has drawn me to that conclusion. And nothing in this thread has convinced me that the coin is counterfeit. Who said it was counterfeit ? ANACS does not normally send their numismatic authenticators or graders to coin shows. Who looked at it ? A brief informal opinion at a coin show is not the same as submitting a coin for actual certification. And how is it known that this coin is "Chinese" ?

I have a BIG "wide screen" PC display - top-of-the-line, 4K resolution and all.

Before condemning a coin as a "counterfeit", it is necessary to know the diagnostics and characteristics of the genuine article.

1934 Washington quarters were produced in vast quantities. Many dies were involved. Three different obverse hub types are known (light, medium, and heavy motto). Many dies would have reached a very late die state, like that of the coin shown at the beginning of this thread. Note the heavy flow lines and extensive die erosion which is particularly visible at the front of Washington's neck. The longer a die is in use, the greater the potential for die scratches, die breaks, and other defects to form.

Here is an earlier die state coin (another 1934 medium motto) that has been recently certified as PCGS MS68, with "Secure Plus" (the maximum level of scrutiny available from PCGS), and the coin is also "CAC" approved (which is yet another level of professional independent scrutiny). Note the heavy die scratching around "LIBERTY" and the pronounced "lathe marks" (arc lines) across the hair braid, neck, and in front of the neck. Also note the stray raised lines in the area of the date (to the right of the "1" at bust truncation; extending up and to the right from the middle of the right side of the "9"). These are characteristics of many genuine 1934 Washington quarters:



Here is the reverse of the same coin. Note the overall "mushy" characteristics and odd surface textures (raised random lines, pimples, etc, especially obvious in the olive branch above "OLL"), and this isn't even a late die state:


And here is a different coin - an NGC certified 1934 Washington quarter. Note the die crack extending to the right of the Eagle's head and another across "RIBUS". Die cracks in this area are very common on silver Washington quarters:


Tool marks have frequently been cited over the years as a tell-tale sign of a counterfeit, but many genuine coins have accidental die gouges. So it is important to learn how to distinguish the difference between die polish lines, die scratches, die cracks, and "tool marks".

 

I don't know. I work on average about 80-90 hours per week, and I still have time to read about 3 books per week, and retain a good deal of them. Laziness isn't an excuse to not do a little work.

 

As the person that did the post ?

 

How do the lathe lines get on a coins features , as I've seen them on the fields but not on raised areas like Washington's neck ?

 

So you don't see any differences in these two quarters?

 

One is a later die state with exaggerated die erosion flow lines. The lettering may appear to be very slightly thicker on one, but that is a result of the die erosion and image illumination angles.

 

Perhaps my meaning would've been clearer if I'd said "mustn't".

Actually, more often than you apparently think (in both directions), and sometimes on hot-button issues that I couldn't possibly mention in this forum. But it is the exception, not the rule.

And we both know that we're both familiar with strongly-held opinions. And parachutes, and what can happen when they've been packed improperly.

 

I see, different photo's, at different resolutions, with different color adjustments and different lighting angles.

I asked the OP for some "Tells" and got a reply regarding "lathe lines". I have a 1935 that has those very same "lathe lines".

The metallic analysis done and posted for all to see tells me that the coin in the OP, for all intents and purposes, appears to be authentic. Especially considering the fact that the 90%/10% alloy composition also contains "trace" elements of which aluminum would certainly be acceptable.

The final straw would be to have the coin examined by either Dan or a TPG.
Of course, the "sky is falling" crowd will quickly revert to the fact that sometimes the TPG's even miss them.

So, aside from all the name calling and intellectual innuendo's, this thread has evolved into nothing that offers any meaningful tell of a coin being counterfeit other than "personal opinion" based upon two 2D photograph's and no real expert opinion other than DCARR's.

Additionally, the thread title of "The Next Generation Of Chinese Counterfeits Have Arrived" is a bit misleading since a PCGS Article exists regarding 1934 Washington Counterfeits "from 1985". The articles were written in 2009 but the article is about coins first viewed in 1985.

http://www.pcgs.com/News/A-Blazing-Gem-1934-Quarter-simply-Too-Good-To-Be

I am not going to question every coin I've ever purchased, either raw or slabbed, as to whether or not its authentic as it is just a waste of time.

 

Well, since the lines exist prior to hubbing and the only thing that hubbing does is push the surface into the coin, I can see where devices would have lathe lines. But then, I'm no expert.

And really, concentric lathe lines are not visible on the OP's coins but evidence of circular die polish is evident.