Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;SuperDave, post: 2367429, member: 1892&quot;]Hmmm. Interesting. Only one of the two &quot;major&quot; attribution features for this one is available - the mint mark position and appearance of &quot;VDB&quot; - as the reverse is too worn for usable data. The mint mark position and tilt are pretty accurate for Mint Mark #3 (of the four known), but the appearance is off. The serifs are parallel, as they should be, but the top serif ought to be flush with the right curve of the S, and it&#039;s too far left. In addition when your image (which ain&#039;t too bad <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie1" alt=":)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /> ) is magnified, I see an incongruous area of darkness around it from about 1:00 to 9:00 (therefore not explainable by light) which makes me believe the mint mark is added rather than original. It is not inconceivable that a postmint hit caused the serif to be moved.</p><p><br /></p><p>If it&#039;s an original Cent at all. 2.81g is 10% light, and generally speaking once one reaches 5% weight loss, details are just about gone. Not much of a coin&#039;s weight is contained in the devices. That said, I&#039;m not expert-enough with Lincoln Wheats to be positive that a 10% weight loss precludes this much remaining detail.</p><p><br /></p><p>All the same, added up I do not believe this coin to be a genuine 1909-S VDB, and likely not a genuine Cent. These are broadly and widely counterfeited and faked, and a cautious collector must be pessimistic and pleasantly surprised when wrong, not the other way around.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in