?? weight is off on morgan dollar....

Discussion in 'Coin Chat' started by mrweaseluv, May 14, 2021.

  1. mrweaseluv

    mrweaseluv Supporter! Supporter

    Not by much... but enough to question it's authenticity... it comes in at 26.45g but i don't think the wear adds up to almost .3g
    am i missing something?
    20210514_214421 (2).jpg 20210514_214431 (2).jpg
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. William F

    William F Well-Known Member

    The dark-ish toning looks suspicious to me but I've never seen a counterfeit with the amount of wear/bag marks that one has, usually they look polished to death and that one doesn't...o_OInteresting...

    EDIT: I guess it could be artificially beat up to make it look like it has seen circulation but I'm not sure, will be interested to hear what others have to say about it.
     
    Last edited: May 14, 2021
  4. potty dollar 1878

    potty dollar 1878 Well-Known Member

    Might be fake I don't like that grey stuff now I need to bid before its to late goodbye;).
     
    William F likes this.
  5. cpm9ball

    cpm9ball CANNOT RE-MEMBER

    Yes, you are missing something. That is one fugly Morgan. ;););););)
     
    Morgandude11 likes this.
  6. mrweaseluv

    mrweaseluv Supporter! Supporter

    for $17.50 at a yard sale it seems ok lol under melt anyway, they had some much nicer ones but wanted stupid prices for em...
     
    MIGuy likes this.
  7. -jeffB

    -jeffB Greshams LEO Supporter

    Really, really tiny chance that there's any silver in that thing. Those letters and stars are ridiculous.
     
    manny9655 and Matthew Kruse like this.
  8. Matthew Kruse

    Matthew Kruse Young Numismatist

    Looks like a bad fake to me. (Not silver) Like @-jeffB said, the letters on there are much thicker than the real thing and the color is off too. Did you buy it?
     
  9. Morgandude11

    Morgandude11 As long as it's Silver, I'm listening

    Absolutely a fake. 0% chance of being genuine. Not even a good fake. Looks cast to me. Beijing’s lesser line of frauds.
     
    serafino likes this.
  10. serafino

    serafino Well-Known Member

    For you guys that know Morgans, is being .3 grams light a concern with that level of wear.
     
  11. -jeffB

    -jeffB Greshams LEO Supporter

    What "level of wear"?

    It's a terrible fake. Half the poor bird's butt is gone. Wear doesn't remove device detail from recessed areas.

    I wouldn't be a bit surprised if it's thicker than a normal Morgan, to bring its weight close to normal with a copper core.
     
    serafino and mrweaseluv like this.
  12. dltsrq

    dltsrq Grumpy Old Man

    Have you tested it with a magnet?
     
  13. mrweaseluv

    mrweaseluv Supporter! Supporter

    Off hand guys.. I was 99% sure it was fake when i bought it :D is for my growing collection of counterfits.. will look good with the others :D
     
    MIGuy likes this.
  14. mrweaseluv

    mrweaseluv Supporter! Supporter

    not magnetic and pretty sure it is a fake :D
     
    dltsrq likes this.
  15. MIGuy

    MIGuy Supporter! Supporter

    I think that's neat. Bravo!
     
  16. Razz

    Razz Critical Thinker

    Fake. Parallel top arrow feather was only on the 1878 and 1879 reverse...
     
    manny9655 likes this.
  17. johnmilton

    johnmilton Well-Known Member

    Unfortunately the “O” mint mark is incorrect. It should be a single “C” which stands for made in China. The sad truth is these fakes have been issued for years and are well distributed.
     
  18. ZoidMeister

    ZoidMeister Hamlet Squire of Tomfoolery . . . . . Supporter

    Here's mine. Got it free with a Hobo Quarter that I bought.

    It's about 2 grams light.

    Z



    IMG_2012.JPG IMG_2013.JPG
     
    potty dollar 1878 likes this.
  19. Publius2

    Publius2 Well-Known Member

    0.3 grams is 1.12% light. I don't know what the manufacturing tolerance was on Morgans but 1% light is fairly typical of well-worn coins. So, in this case the weight is not the definitive factor in authenticity. What others have said, is.
     
  20. manny9655

    manny9655 Well-Known Member

    The denticles on the obverse between 1 o'clock and 3 o'clock look bad, way smaller than the ones on the opposite side of the obverse. I don't think that's due to wear. There are other things too, such as the stars, which you mentioned. They're mushy and not sharp like on a real coin. The same with "In God We Trust". To me this coin screams "fake". But why someone would fake a common Morgan is beyond me. I guess you can't trust anyone these days.
     
  21. -jeffB

    -jeffB Greshams LEO Supporter

    Because then you can get $17.50 at a yard sale for a few cents' worth of metal. And because a fake 1893-S will get a lot more scrutiny than a fake 1888-O.
     
    ZoidMeister likes this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page