Finally a 93 S Morgan

Discussion in 'Coin Chat' started by SchwaVB57, Oct 14, 2018.

  1. SchwaVB57

    SchwaVB57 Well-Known Member

    Found this beauty today. To bad it is only a hole filler. IMG_0902.JPG IMG_0903.JPG
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Legoman1

    Legoman1 Active Member

    Is it silver copy? Or is it just a non-silver novelty copy?
     
    Santinidollar likes this.
  4. Legoman1

    Legoman1 Active Member

    Nice replica coin though, it isn't immediately visible that its a copy.
     
    SchwaVB57 likes this.
  5. SchwaVB57

    SchwaVB57 Well-Known Member

    It is silver, but the OD is slightly smaller.
     
  6. USCoinCollector42

    USCoinCollector42 Well-Known Member

    Wow! It looks DMPL MS-66!
    Not bad for a 125 year old coin. You should send it for grading :)
     
    SchwaVB57 likes this.
  7. SchwaVB57

    SchwaVB57 Well-Known Member

    SGS might give it a MS68 DMPL
     
  8. Conder101

    Conder101 Numismatist

    It is if you know anything about Morgans. No Morgan, even the proofs or DMPL's had that kind of look. The date font is a joke. Mint mark style is completely wrong. And a beaded border? All that condemns it even without COPY on the eagles breast. Which by the way is NOT in compliance with the HPA rules for marking replicas. COPY has to be incuse in san-serif lettering.
     
    Paul M. and Seattlite86 like this.
  9. Seattlite86

    Seattlite86 Outspoken Member

    I think the copy seems reasonably stamped, even if it is not in compliance. However, yes to everything you just said.
     
  10. SchwaVB57

    SchwaVB57 Well-Known Member

    It is not the exact size of the original coin, so it is not an exact replica. Slightly smaller OD.
     
  11. Conder101

    Conder101 Numismatist

    HPA doesn't say you only have to stamp exact replicas, you have to stamp anything that purports to be an original numismatic item. So if it looks a lot like a coin or token it has to be stamped.
     
    Paul M. likes this.
  12. Seattlite86

    Seattlite86 Outspoken Member

    Tell that to Dan Carr...
     
  13. Legoman1

    Legoman1 Active Member

    When I said "isn't immediately visible", I meant that from afar, or to a non-experienced collector. The copy's still not that bad. I've seen cheaper, more careless copies of coins.
     
  14. Conder101

    Conder101 Numismatist

    I have, a long time ago. And I still believe his pieces are in violation of the HPA.
     
    Seattlite86 likes this.
  15. Seattlite86

    Seattlite86 Outspoken Member

    Lol, you clearly didn’t mean us :p even from afar, it looks wrong, but it makes a fine place holder.
     
    SchwaVB57 likes this.
  16. Legoman1

    Legoman1 Active Member

    What's "lol" supposed to mean in your sentence? Are you trying to allude that I have never seen a Morgan Dollar before, or are you trying to turn my complement to SchwaVB57 for purchasing a nice replica into a laughable statement?
     
  17. SchwaVB57

    SchwaVB57 Well-Known Member

    I posted the thread as a joke in kind. I bought the TOKEN because I will never own a 93 S and it fills a hole in my album. As for trying to fool anyone, the TOKEN will never fool anyone that collects Morgan Dollars or anyone that has any basic coin knowledge. I like it and the number one rule of collecting should be buy the specimen, never the label or pedigree.
     
    Seattlite86 likes this.
  18. SilverDollar2017

    SilverDollar2017 Morgan dollars

    Nice hole filler, although owning one would probably make me want to get the real thing...someday.... :p
     
  19. Legoman1

    Legoman1 Active Member

    Yes, nice hole/album filler and replica.
     
  20. tibor

    tibor Supporter! Supporter

    So, is it silver or another metal?
     
  21. SchwaVB57

    SchwaVB57 Well-Known Member

Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page