Matt's Counterfiet Gold Coin Thread

Dutchman we need more threads like this , thanks , also I nominateted it for TOTW honors as I think some others should do also .
rzage

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Lostdutchman,

Looking over Bill Fivaz book, he says alot of the counterfeits are PL. This one seems to look like that in the photo's, was that the case?

Did you also notice the tool marks in the letters on the reverse? And, is the detail missing on the eagles feathers on the reverse due to wear or lack of detail from the transfer process?
I have also nominated this post and suggest others to do the same, and I look forward to seeing more coins that are counterfeit gold.

I also noticed when comparing to the book, the 10 dollar indian just surface details look 'rough' overall, grainy.

 

Bill Fivaz has wrote a book on US counterfeit gold, and he focuses on what a counterfeit coin should look like. PCGS
Guide to grading and counterfeit detection focuses on what a
genuine coin should look like. Get both, you can't go wrong!

Thanks for the reccomends, I am not planning on pursuing oro coins, I just asked the question in the general sense, as the principle might or might not apply across the board.

I am still waiting for my latest coin book, the parsley overton book, my reading otherwise is benchley at work for breaks, and I am reading lew wallaces book about the fall of constantinople called "the prince of India"

 

Wow, what an interesting thread.

Thanks to all of you.

I really dig the skill and dedication you guys possess and display.

Things like this make me wonder about the people who made these coins. It seems it would take quite a bit of skill, intelligence and morale depravity to do so.

 

You may want to pick up the book, "Numismatic Forgery", it explains exactly how the counterfeiters make these coins. It's quite an interesting read, it explains everything from making dies, to casting, alterations, embossing, etc.

Very good read

 

VERY VERY interesting thread! Thanks for the high rez photos so I can learn. I see fake silver all the time on here and at the flea market, but never get to see gold up close.
Yet again another reason to buy PCGS, NGC, & ANACS certified gold until you know for sure what you're doing!

 

Great thread, Matt! I hope you will keep this one going as new fakes come into the shop (hopefully not many!) One must assume that multiple coins were struck from the fake dies, so these images become a sort of visual library for spotting other clones. Many thanks!

On the Saint, I notice some spikes coming off the rims, and some raised bumps on some of the tips of the eagle's longest wing feathers.

 

I figured that I see enough pieces that I should at least take some good pictures of them and share the knowledge... that's what we are all here for right?

The $10 was very proof like. When I originally looked at the piece I said to the gentleman who brought it in that "This piece is either a proof or a counterfiet" and as soon as I hit it with a glass it was apparent that it was a fake.

I got to thinking last night about what might cause the struck pieces to be grainy. I'm sure they didn't have the best quality control on their planchet production process and if the planchets were rough to begin with this would leave some residual pitting on the coin. I'm not sure if this is correct but this could be a factor.

I have 2 other $2.5's that were brought in with the first 2. These 2 are scary good. I'm going to shoot them here in a few minutes and get them posted.

 

9 out of the last 15 classic US gold coins I had walk into the shop were counterfiet's. I was able to buy 6 of them for scrap. I will make sure to post as many as I can when there is time. If anyone has any others that they can shoot really high res pics of they would like to add to the thread feel free to do so.

 

Not in a direct way. It was the inspiration I needed to finally pursue this project. I have been thinking about doing something like this for a long time. I just needed the motivation to go forth. I have to constantly wade through this stuff every day and I didn't realize that it could be a resource in itself to teach people what to look for. If I can help just one person from getting nailed on one of these I would consider this a whopping success.

 

The $2.5's I'm sure are struck. The $10 and the $20 could very well be cast. I didn't see any retooling of some of the deeper devices that you see sometimes on cast pieces because they didn't cast well. That doesn't mean anything. If I had to make an educated guess I would say that the $10 is cast and the $20 could go either way. No visible casting seams on any of the coins posted.

 

You may very be correct Doug.

From my experience when they cast the $2.5's a lot of the time they have to go back and recut some of the feathers in the headdress. I spent about 10 minutes on each coin (I still have the $2.5's in hand) this morning and I couldn't find any obvious recutting on the feathers. Not necessarily meaning that they weren't cast but I just thought this was more likely that they were struck. I (and I'm sure others) would be interested in what you see to sway you towards the $2.5's being cast.

 

Here are the pics of the other 2.

In hand they look pretty good but when I was editing the pictures I can see some weakness in the headdress's. It's amazing what you can see in a picture sometimes.





1929

 

GDJMSP may be right, as he has alot more knowledge than me on the subject.

I haven't heard of many counterfeit US gold coins being cast though, I feel most are struck.

I have an article on some cast morgans on my wall, it says to zero in on where the fields meet the devices, under magnification you can see weakness, it is grainy and not sharp and crisp like a genuine piece should be. These coins do look grainy..

By the way, those last $2.50's are very good, I see some weakness in the detail on the headress, what appears to be tooling through the letters, perhaps a depression (It may be a contact mark though), and a few pimples, but that's it. What did you see on these in hand? From just the photo's these look suspicious but I don't think that would be enough to deem them counterfeit just from the photo's. Scary...

The thing is, I've seen 'blems' and such, raised bumps on the coin on struck pieces too, especially in Bill Fivaz's book. Some of these were struck, and although I think most of pimples you would see on cast counterfeits, I think its possible to have these also on struck counterfeits. I may be wrong, however.

 

Guys, are these two soft-rounded depressions, well, depressions? Or contact marks? They look like depressions to me. They blend in with the fields, have soft rounded edges and may have luster in them.

 

They are definitely depressions not not contact marks.