Counterfeit nickel!

The fruit of my Christmas roll search was a counterfeit 1969 nickel! The fuzzy, cast-like reverse was what first keyed me in to it. And then I noticed it lacks a mintmark. Of course, I could be wrong and it could just be an insanely late die-state. Unfortunately, I can't get any scans at the moment. :headbang:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

i do not know much about the nickel series.. . but why would someone fake a 1969 nickle? just because they can? lol

 

I have a pic here somewhere of a fake 1964 Nickel. Sounds like yours look like the one I've seen. I'll try to post some pic's.

Speedy

 

Due to economy of scale, it probably wouldn't be profitable to fake a 1969 nickel unless you had the ability to make a HUGE amount of them. Unless someone did it for a motive other than profit, maybe someone tried it just to see if they could?

Then again, there's the possibility it's genuine but just damaged, or a late die state, or something of that nature. Would love to see a pic if you can manage it.

Any nickel 1968 or later should have a mintmark on it so that does seem a little suspicious. (Starting in 1968 all Philadelphia-minted nickels used a "P" mintmark on the obverse.) Maybe it's an error, or a fake, or someobdy filed the mintmark off, or it's damaged, or something... there's many possible explanations lol... if you posted a pic I'm sure trained eyes could narrow it down.

The irony is a notable fake of a 1969 nickel may be owrth more than a genuine one to some people lol...

 

It could have been used as a donor in an electroplating experiment.

 

Yes, but how many nickels would you have to make to overcome the cost of the equipment? Of course, if its cast, it may not be so expensive....

 

It is true that there were no nickels in 1968 without mintmarks, but Philadelphia didn't start putting P's on them until 1980. Philadelphia-minted nickels throughout the '70s have no mintmark.

 

Stand partially corrected... Philadelphia didn't start putting its "P" mintmark on nickels until 1980. However Philadelphia didn't mint any nickels in 1969. Which makes the 1969 nickel with no mintmark somewhat of an oddity... would have to either be an error or counterfeit, unless somehow the "D" or "S" mintmark it would have to have to be genuinely minted that year was somehow removed post-mint.

 

Not the best of scans, but it should do.

 

I dont think its a fake.

 

Nope-- They minted 1970-S Nickels for circulation. In fact they minted 241,464,814 of them!

Speedy

 

? That's a 1969.

In that condition, could it be possible the mintmark just wore off? Looks real to me... at least don't see anything obviously fake about it.

Don't think it's cast, just heavily worn, dirty, and maybe a little corroded. Not been treated well the last 39 years lol...

 

On the Reverse does it say across the top "Made in China"?

{sorry, couldn't resist}

 

Do you have a scale to compare it's weight? It looks like some of my change that collects in my cars drink holders, coins turn that color quickly after being coffee stained!

 

I was replying to a post that NathansCoin has now edited.

Speedy

 

That's why I usually use the quote button.

 

looks like a metal detector find. not sure about the missing mintmark though, maybe a grease filled die? dd:

 

I dunno, its not the color that bothers me. Anyone feel up to examining it in hand?

 

I think it is real just corroded. And it could very well be missing the mintmark, I have seen other 68, 69, and 70 nickels that didn't have mintmarks. They resulted from filled dies similar to the 1989 P no mintmark quarter. It is suprising that the hobby goes crazy over the 1922 no D cent, and has some respect for the 89 no P quarter, but has paid no attention whatsoever to the no mintmark 68, 69, and 70 nickels.