how do you spot fake Trade Dollars, anyway?

I was looking at a TruView of a coin from the same rev die (same cracks) and see no doubling, so probably an artifact of photography.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

A new Trade Dollar arrived in the mail today. An 1876-S which I got cheap at an eBay auction. The weight and diameter were good. It passed the magnet and slide test. Other than it being cleaned, it looked good in hand. Then I looked at it with my loupe. Questions now have arisen. It looks like it took some abuse over the years. It has something that looks like a chop mark by the eagle talon. It was hit so hard, it bubbles out a little on the observe.


The mint mark is my main concern, it looks like a worn out blob. Which can be a sign of a fake. Hopefully it was just damaged sometime and then worn. When I hold the loupe just right, I can make out an S hiding in it.

If anything, this Trade Dollar is a good study for me.

Edit: The S in the TrueView above this, looks the same.

 

That looks less like a chop mark and more like just damage to me.

I'm not a Trade Dollar expert, but I don't see any of the normal tells of a counterfeit here. Dentils look great, devices are sharp, surface looks like normal wear and tear except for that dent.

 

I believe it's genuine, too. A hit on the rev, can't really call it a chop mark, maybe some kind of a test. the micro s is common (I/II) and often looks like a little blob.
The II/II micro S is scarce.

 

Thank you 2 for your replies. The S had me a little worried till I saw the S looked the same in the TrueView.


As for that mark/dent. Looking at with my loupe, it certainly looks like some kind of punch hit it very hard at some point. It certainly wasn't a standard chop mark punch.


For me anyway, this coin has an interesting tail to tell. I'm going to check out as much info as I can, see if something pops.

 

It's supposed to be tale.

 

That may be the first time I've seen someone quote themselves.
The mark on the rev. is right over the claw, but it looks a lot like a mark left by a twist drill used to see if the coin had a base metal core under silver plate.

 

Here's a New Listing beauty on the Bay. Interesting specimen.

 

Looks like a carved Tums tablet.

 

Well, if both sides are from the same coin... fakeroo!

 

That’s just horrible. I had a well worn 74 that was cool. Graded g-4. This is nothing like it

 

Well, at least most of the coins shown look like the counterfeit tried. I purchased some legitimate coins from a seller and they threw this in for free. I got a chuckle when I looked it up.

 

Yep, the water's rising fast -- that poor eagle is already starting to go under!

 

Nice Beijing mint frost!

 

Wrong reverse and 78 p was proof only. A fine example of the wuhan mint lol. Probably used in the wet market too to buy a couple pounds of bats

 

I saw that coin for sale at the Bay a little while back, plus a bunch of Wish .com TD's. They disapeared quickly. When I saw that TD at the Bay you posted, I laughed like a braying mule.

 

Hi gang. I have a Trade Dollar, an 1877-CC that I bought a little while ago. Mainebill in another thread was questioning if it's authentic. I finally took some better pictures of this coin tonight.

It passed the basic tests. Weight, diameter, and the Neodymium Magnet Test. The reeded edge looked good. I compared it to a few TD's I have. I also compared it to a fake I have. It looks nothing like the fake. Here's the new pictures I took of the coin.

What it looks like to me. I believe it was a really dark toned coin at one time that someone decided to clean. I believe it's authentic, but what do you guys/gals think?

 

It looks genuine to me, except I keep going back to one problem. The cc on the reverse should start under then N in GRAINS. I've seen the mint mark start under the S, like yours, on some 1878CC coins, but I haven't seen an example like yours of an 1877CC. That doesn't mean it's fake, though, because the mint marks are added after striking, so maybe I just haven't seen any...

 

IF the coin is a counterfeit, you should be able to match the position of the "CC" with a genuine coin on the Internet so that won't help. Good fakes are copied from a genuine coin. It would be just like a dummy to use a reverse "CC" die from another date in which case this coin would have a unique mint mark position! The member above may have checked this for you.

It's a little too granular for me. Check out the leaves in the branch to see if there are two tiny round pimples. That would be a bad sign.

 

That kind of "dumb" mistake is still pretty common, though, isn't it? I mean, we pay more attention to the fakes that are more deceptive, but don't we still see plenty where the counterfeiters step on their own... obverse?