Very Tough Quiz (with a twist?)

Those are small die chips, I had thought the same thing.
They also with that high of magnification and lighting could be a high ridge of luster.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

All genuine different die states.

 

This is a tough one and you all have been handicapped by only seeing micrographs of the date. A & B are struck counterfeits that appeared about a year ago. They should fool most collectors who are not Jefferson collectors and very many of the smaller and older dealers. An experienced collector/dealer/authenticator should immediately become suspicious because the coins don't look "right." I cannot make it clearer. It is something you feel in your gut the minute you see certain coins. Then you must try to prove yourself wrong while trying to authenticate the coin. With both fakes, the luster is "off" for a MS 1950-D and nickels of this era. The edges are sharp and semi-PL, one clue to many modern fakes. We've not seen two of these fakes from the same die so I cannot provide "markers" to ID other 50-D counterfeits. As I posted, this was a tough one as each of the images looks genuine. Just remember this is strictly A GAME and not a Gotcha. That's why voting is anonymous.

 

What would be expected to occur with metal flow? Why would I ask or care?

 

charley, asked: "What would be expected to occur with metal flow?" [An excellent thought out question. A+ ] "Why would I ask or care?" [F-
Only you know the answer to that and IMHO no one else should care to answer.]

 

If I understand the question correctly, it's asking if the coin struck from spark erosion dies will exhibit the metal flow lines typical of genuine coins.

The answer is yes. The dies made from the spark erosion process are still hardened steel dies. Coins struck from these dies, when properly made and finished, will exhibit the same characteristics as any genuinely struck article.

 

Good! Ship 'em back to China where they belong!

 

I would have guessed A was bad, C was good, B not sure. I took a look at authentic ones on CoinFacts to see what the date should look like. The tip of the 9 on A isn't broad enough. The mushiness makes you think worn dies, but it doesn't have die wear patterns or die fatigue doubling on the date. Also, the ribbon is very weak. B has the weak ribbon, but the date looks better.

 

Good eye! The problem with images is that they are images. Lighting can change every aspect of an image. If the three coins were in hand thy would not fool you. BTW, in my answer I posted the edges of the fakes were sharp. That's true but I neglected to add semi-PL.

 

This would have made this Poll much easier for all. Anyone NOT see the difference?



FAKE




Genuine





Genuine





Fake

 

Henning admitted to the Secret Service he squeezed his dies into planchets; they were not die struck (again, according to him).

 

Hey Joe, thanks for resurrecting these old posts so I could make copies.
Henning must know how he made them so perhaps everyone should start using the words "DIE SQUEEZED" rather than "die struck." Do you have any information about how he made his dies from his testimony?

 

Just that he told the secret service he squeezed them rather than using die impact methods. I'm guessing it's just a slower process rather then the rapid succession of die strikes. Perhaps that also somewhat contributed to his notable weak details, but I also believe he used circulated coins as hosts for his dies.

 

Also, he claims to have used an orange stick, industrial grease, and diamond dust to make dies.

 

My wife said fake, I said bite me, she won!

 

Sounds to me like a big lie to coverup the actual truth. Those things don't make dies, they improve them. If they had not found planchets where he made the coins, I would have believed he was the one passing them for others. This still could be true if he were some sort of "go-between." Guess we'll never know. I wonder if the FBI kept their records.

 

I would like to know if they found blanks at his mint when they located it or if they were unsrtuck planchets. He didn't use an upset mill. Be curious to know which they were as people often confuse the two. I have evidence that he didn't upset them, but likely added them by having a deeper rim gutter on his dies.

 

It could be a cover up. But many things he told the authorities turned out to be true.

Again, if you can find those photos of the fake Hennings from China, I would really appreciate it.

 

Well he used a transfer process to make the dies. Not actually sure how he then used a "squeezing" process