Unofficial CoinTalk Dark Side “Coin” Grade Poll #3 1797 Large Cent

OK, looking for the TPG grade for this well detailed example; details of this one would place it in the top 20 for the variety (S-139).

If you are so inclined, you can also post your details/ net (EAC) grade just for fun…

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Why would it be an "unofficial" poll?
And why is it a "Dark Side"?

Does it have anything to do with it being counterfeit?

 

Figured it was easier to be unofficial than the "official" Coin Talk anything...

 

I think it’s a scary good counterfeit by the weakness in the hair and the porosity that looks more planchet related or deliberate than true environmental damage. This one not being a series I study as much could get by me

 

Especially as the porosity is just on the portrait not on the fields where it would more likely be. Probably from the environmental damaged host coin for the transfer dies.

 

Also seeing the same pitting on the lettering date and other details. The more I look at it I realize it’s a counterfeit by transfer dies from a porous genuine host coin why the perfect fields with no pitting

 

I voted 45. I would expect it to be a details grade.
Just assuming it's fake (I know nothing about these), but there does appear to be a few raised dots in the fields, especially on the reverse? Is that normal?

 

The surfaces are pretty common for a lightly environmentally challenged early copper. Bill is on to something with the observation of the lack of details on a fairly high detail coin...

 

55 is my guess as to what the holder said

 

Counterfeit. Very grainy especially in the hair. There appear to be tool marks or marks that don’t seem to come necessarily from the die state.

The reverse has some raised pimples as mentioned scattered throughout especially near the right ribbon and second 0 in 100.

I would put it in the 40 camp.

 

The mushiness of the reverse lettering is what convinces me this is a fake.

 

A friend did an autocad comparison of this one to a genuine one; the scratches stand out but a dead on match.

 

I wrestled with this one. Can't speak to its genuosity (should be a word). TPG grade AU-50 details. I think they would think it's been dipped and retoned. EAC grade EF-40, Net VF-30.

I am waiting to have my head handed to me!

 

Awesome response Publius2.

 

This is the S-139 variety. The softness of the hair in the center is characteristic of the variety. This is a superbly well-done die transfer counterfeit, and it probably would have gotten by me if I was not being overly careful. I would not hold this one against the graders.

I would probably attribute that to a defective planchet

Raised pimples that are not on other coins of the same variety is an excellent indicator that a coin is fake. It is my go-to diagnostic if I am not initially sure one way or another. Good eye!

Some varieties, like the 1798 BB-105 Bust Dollar, have die chips in the later die states that look like pimples. Verify varieties closely to avoid condemning good coins.

Particularly around D in UNITED? I checked to see if that is a strike artifact on genuine coins, but it does not appear to be. The edges of R and A in AMERICA seem rather rough and struck that way

 

If this is a fake that's why YOU are the fake-exposer and not me. I'd call it detail XF, net VF20 or 25, ugly surfaces. TPG might call it "AU details, environmental damage"

If cheap enough I'd buy it, but would later replace it with a lower-grade nicer-looking piece of the same variety and diestate.

 

My vote is fake, therefore grade is irrelevant. Other people have posted specific reasons. To me it just doesn't look right. If it looks to be good to be true, it's a safe bet that it probably is.

 

Thanks John- really value your opinion! I worked with two other authenticators on this example and both agreed this is one of the most deceptive fakes out there; one actually PM'd me in the middle of the night saying it kept him up that night...

And of course if authentic it shouldn't have a near twin:

 

Great detective work Jack! Can the counterfeiter be tracked down by the ownership of the host coin? I would assume that some other host coins could be tracked down as well?