Howdy folks! I would love to hear your thoughts on these two coins. There are things about the Morgan that strike me as "off." It weighs spot on at 26.7.grams. What do you think about the mint mark? I bought it loose and put it in its current holder. I have a grand $40 into it. Regarding the 1914 D, I think it is good, but I would like to hear your thoughts before sticking it in my album. Thanks!
I absolutely 100% do not like the Morgan. It is a good fake if you look at it from a distance... but something feels off. My feelings were confirmed with your closeup of the mintmark. Look at the texture of the devices - instead of being smooth, they are very rough. And look at the pattern on Liberty's cheek. The cheek almost has the "snakeskin" effect that proofs from about 20 years ago had, when laser etching first was used. I have a couple of ideas of how this was created, but neither of them are good. I'd wait for more opinions, but if you can get a refund on the Morgan I'd start thinking about that option immediately.... that is a fake for sure. Also... for the price... you'd need to be sure that was about an MS-66 certified... the price you paid raw is... high. The wheat cent... nothing immediately jumps out at me, but your pictures aren't great. Can you take some more pictures of that one? NGC says the most common fake is an added mintmark on this one... a closeup of the date/MM area might help us.
When I said "a grand $40," I meant a total of $40. It looks so close to real that it is scary. I have a GSA 1884 CC that I was comparing it to, and it is really close. The rough letters, especially on the reverse and mint mark, were about the only things that jumped out at me. It weighs right and even the tone sounds silver. I am tempted to keep it as an example.
That is the first and most obvious thing that came to mind. An alternate and possibly scarier method (because the technology is newer and can be improved)... dies were 3D printed (or models that dies could be made from). That would be easier to explain the parallel lines on the cheek.
LOL... thanks for the clarification... I was so sad to have to tell you that you wasted a thousand bucks. If you only paid $40 for it... well, I still wouldn't have done it, but that is far more palatable!
1914-D I like, but that's a coin best bought graded/authenticated. I'd vote added mintmark, looks a little proud. D is a little far left? Maybe a shot at an Obv-6 https://www.cointalk.com/threads/authentic-vs-counterfeit-1914-d-lincoln.76229/page-2
Thanks for that, RTE. This pretty much definitely proves the mintmark is fake. It is not in the right position (it is too far left, too far down, and rotated left as compared to rotated right). It is also not the right style mintmark. I would have confidence calling the 1914D Lincoln a fake as well now.
It's harder to tell looking at pictures, Might be worth having a professional grader take a look at the 1914-D. Case and point this one in a certified holder.
Well, this is why I am not a dealer! I like coins, but wow am I scared of what is out there! I will take the 1914 D to a local coin shop and send the Morgan back where it came from. I appreciate all your help!
In the first set of images I noticed that both coins have the same bizarre diagonal "texture" across most of both sides. I'm thinking laser engraved dies from some cheap equipment. Not sure how they transfer the design though. Years ago on another forum there was a long thread about a Canadian cent. 1891 or 1892, one of the varieties but it shouldn't exist for that year or something, certified MS65 by ICCS, long discussion about whether it was a new variety, turns out it was extremely well done laser etched dies. Very similar parallel lines across the devices but almost microscopic. It was scary good. Someday soon we probably won't be able to tell.
