Your thoughts real or fake?

Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by Jasongj, Jul 2, 2020.

  1. Jasongj

    Jasongj Member

  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Jasongj

    Jasongj Member

    Here is another one.
     

    Attached Files:

  4. cpm9ball

    cpm9ball CANNOT RE-MEMBER

    Without magnification, the last digit of the 1888 doesn't look right to me. I don't know about the '85 because I can't enlarge it, either. ~ Chris
     
  5. Inspector43

    Inspector43 72 Year Collector

  6. johnmilton

    johnmilton Well-Known Member

    Yes, the third "8" is different from the previous two. It makes sense. You make a very good matrix die and leave the last digit off. Then then you add one to the working dies.

    As for the 1885-P, the date looks better but the dentiles don't appear to be the same length all the way around.

    I would say both are bad, and both are scary. The Chinese are getting better ... sadly.
     
  7. Robert Ransom

    Robert Ransom Well-Known Member

  8. Michael K

    Michael K Well-Known Member

    I don't know. However, here is a comparison photo with a known real one
    from 1888- Philly. Yours is much farther away from the dentils. And for a coin that is in such good shape, the 8's are all wonky. It's a common date.
    I didn't look at the 1885.
    compare.png
     
    tommyc03 and medoraman like this.
  9. Jasongj

    Jasongj Member

    Thanks for all your knowledge.
     
  10. brokrken

    brokrken Member

    Would have been interesting for this thread to have been a GTG to see if anyone would have identified it as fake. The title clouded our minds!
     
    Etcherman likes this.
  11. QuintupleSovereign

    QuintupleSovereign Well-Known Member

    Agreed with previous posters; the discrepancy between the luster shown sand the weakness of the feathers on the eagle's breast caught my eye.
     
  12. Morgandude11

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

    The date spacing is the dead giveaway. It is genuine Beijing.
     
    Santinidollar likes this.
  13. nuMRmatist

    nuMRmatist Well-Known Member

    Just looks too good condition.

    My .02 (x 50 ;) )
     
  14. CoinCorgi

    CoinCorgi Derp, derp, derp!

    Everytime I see a new thread titled "real or fake" I get my hopes up that it is about implants and not Daniel Carr.
     
    Mainebill and Inspector43 like this.
  15. messydesk

    messydesk Well-Known Member

    It's real, but I'm not crazy about the surfaces. The funny looking 8 at the end is actually the way it tends to look. Leroy Van Allen actually called a few of these "inverted 8" varieties, but the 1888 date punch just looks that way, with the top of the last 8 being a little thick. The date is punched high and almost near, so it looks like VAM 9 is a distinct possibility, but VAMs 2, 12, and 44 also have high dates.
     
  16. Michael K

    Michael K Well-Known Member

    What's the weight?
    If it's correct (I bet it's not), then testing for silver without damaging the coin would prove it either way.
    Since a faker would not use real 90% silver to make this common date.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page