1877 Indian Cent genuine or fake?

I can nail down a 1909 S VDB Lincoln in no time flat, but I'm less experienced with the 1877 key date Indian. What do you think?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Looks pretty good to me. I don't see any telling issues.

 

FAKE.

 

I might have to agree mainly because of the denticles around 2 o'clock on the reverse, but don't take my word for it.

 

I'm only guessing, but the coin kinda looks cast.

 

I'm all for guesses and random comments/thoughts, but someone teach us something here. What do you see? Where's the evidence? Thanks.

 

@C-B-D

https://www.cointalk.com/threads/1877-indian-head-how-to-spot-a-fake.169080/

Scroll down to Post #16 and compare the position of the last feather.

Chris

 

Take my post and opinion out of the reality of the situation.

I just wanted to say "FAKE". ​

 

I may be an idiot (reading it wrong) but according to that, the coin looks okay.

 

If fake it’s interesting how care was taken with the second 7.

 

In that case, I would be an idiot, too!

FWIW, I searched for certified coins and all of them had the same feather configuration as the one you posted. I've been looking for articles citing other identifying markers but have yet to come up with any. Have you checked the NGC or PCGS sites for articles about fake 1877 IHC's?

Chris

 

I'm not any kind of expert on these, but looking at the denticles on both front and back (as already noted by furham) they change too much in appearance as you go around the coin.

These Indian cents were struck. If one side is weak, the opposite side should be strong and vice versa. Yet as you go around the coin, the weak versus strong areas have no such consistency.
The way they alternate is more consistent with having been cast, which these coins never were, but Chinese fakes almost always are.

The rims look rolled, and I don't think that's normal for an Indian cent.

There are members with much more knowledge and experience than I have. One of them will chime in soon.

 

If fake, the counterfeiter appears to have gotten the date, the last feather position and the shallow N on the "ONE" correct. I pulled up pictures of my slabbed PCGS 1877 VF35 to compare. This was bought from a very well respected dealer specializing in small cents.

 

Well a 77 in that high grade should be slabbed first anyway to eliminate the guesswork. I wouldn't be caught dead buying raw keydates where authenticity is questionable.

 

I'm not condemning it, but I also don't like it. Even without the problem on the cheek, which could be a counterfeiter's problem, I would not buy it unless it was certified.

Is the bottom of the "N" in "ONE" weak enough? Here's one I sold many years ago that NGC certified. I bought it raw. My photos are a little fuzzy, but perhaps you can see what I mean about the "N". NOTE: the "N" on the business strikes of this issue is always weak at the bottom. The Proofs can be strong in that area.



Here is another look at the reverse of the same coin.

 

Same here. The diagnostics are correct, but something “feels” off.

 

At first I thought genuine but someone cleaned off the corrosion. But then I got suspicious. Just looking for confirmation one way or the other, but perhaps there isn't any.

 

Cleaning and recoloring is quite definitely a possibility

 

The headdress/feathers was the first thing that jumped out to me

 

Maybe @Jack D. Young could take a look. Not old copper but couldn’t hurt.