here's an AU example to compare: [ATTACH] [ATTACH]
seriously underweight, which completely disqualifies a lightly circulated coin imo. also, edge reeding does not look correct; and the rev...
I immediately zoomed in on the weak dentils and and didn't check the rev die type. My bad. the 78CC with type 1 rev is a very commonly...
21-s looks F15 to me; please let us know the grades!
"O" as in OMG! Here's a real one: [ATTACH] [ATTACH]
1859 is a lower mintage issue with most exported to China; as such it is very scarce in all grades which makes me immediately suspicious of this...
Nice one , Lord M!
here's one of mine lower grade to compare[ATTACH] [ATTACH]
It's fake. AU ish details but dentils absent on most of the rev. Liberty's figure is not very well excecuted.
I'd give about F15. I think it's probably genuine but couldn't be sure without larger pics. Generally, you don't see counterfeits of well worn...
Nice illustration Paddy54!
Reported. Egregious fraud.
That's a heck of a set you are building! All beauties!
I thought this was a very good quiz. Thanks, Insider.
I'm thinking around xf45 to au50; hard to tell on a coin with such a weak strike. I like the look, though.
my experience has been that the less wear on the coin, the less accurate are attempts to grade from photos. With that in mind, I think the IHC...
looks like it's gone.. nice work!
Thanks for the chance, Lord M.! If I win I would like the Clau..Clau..Claudius Roman coin.
I think it's post-mint damage.
The coin on the left has less distinct lettering. The surfaces look strange, dull. The edge reeding doesn't rise all the way to the top of the...
Separate names with a comma.
