bifrost Posted October 11, 2005 Report Share Posted October 11, 2005 Hi, I have recently bought this coin. I am mostly a banknote collector, so I have a bit of difficulty grading this coin. It would also be interesting to get an estimation of its value. Hope to get some input. // Joakim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2coins Posted October 11, 2005 Report Share Posted October 11, 2005 I dont see the photo!!?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bifrost Posted October 11, 2005 Author Report Share Posted October 11, 2005 Hi again, If you have problems seing the photo, then right-click with the mouse were the photo should be, then go to properties and there you get the url. Alternatively here is the adress to the photo: http://hem.passagen.se/stockholms.myntklub...leeagle1904.jpg Hope this will be of help. //Joakim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlueke Posted October 11, 2005 Report Share Posted October 11, 2005 Hi,I have recently bought this coin. I am mostly a banknote collector, so I have a bit of difficulty grading this coin. It would also be interesting to get an estimation of its value. Hope to get some input. // Joakim As what grade did you buy it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burks Posted October 11, 2005 Report Share Posted October 11, 2005 MS for sure. As for what number........couldn't tell you. Wait for someone like Jtryka. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ageka Posted October 11, 2005 Report Share Posted October 11, 2005 Depends upon who would slab it Because the line accros the face is distracting so I would grade it myself as MS 63 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtryka Posted October 11, 2005 Report Share Posted October 11, 2005 This one looks very strange to me, perhaps it's the lighting used in the photos, but something doesn't look right. There are two small marks, one above the 0 in the date and another near the dentils by the first star. If these marks are raised, that would help identify the authenticity of this coin. The fields have a somewhat scuffed appearance, which on gold would require a number of bagmarks on the high points, but on this coin there appear to be none. The details on this coin are very good, but for detail that fine (like an MS-65) there should be much more luster and absolutely clear fields. On the reverse, the details are great, but the tail feathers on the eagle don't look right to me. There are a lot of excellent counterfeit double eagles around, especially the 1904 (which is the most common date of Type 3 double eagle, hence the easiest to pass since very few people scrutinize them as other dates). In fact, I bought a near perfect counterfeit 1904 double eagle from Germany about 2 years ago. I can't say for certain, but for me this one doesn't pass the "smell" test. I would advise either sending it to be certified, or taking it in person to a knowledgable dealer in your area for authentication. If the coin is fake, the good news is that most of the high quality fakes I've seen did contain the correct weight and fineness of gold (or at least very close), so at a minimum you have just under an ounce of gold. If any of you want to compare, I looked at this coin vs. my 1903 double eagle which is genuine and an MS-63. 1903 Obverse 1903 Reverse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ageka Posted October 11, 2005 Report Share Posted October 11, 2005 Just curious What slabber declared that a MS 63 ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtryka Posted October 11, 2005 Report Share Posted October 11, 2005 NGC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ageka Posted October 11, 2005 Report Share Posted October 11, 2005 NGC. Thanks me and my friend a retired coindealer have been buying unslabbed coins in germany france spain etc and had them NGC slabbed So we are kind of calibrated to know what to expect We are obviously very very conservative because on average we are one to two units lower then the slabbed coins coming back from NGC and this means that all surprises in grade are allways good surprises My friend choose NGC for what seems very good reasons I still go with the motto Buy the coin not the slab Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostDutchman Posted October 11, 2005 Report Share Posted October 11, 2005 This one looks very strange to me, perhaps it's the lighting used in the photos, but something doesn't look right. There are two small marks, one above the 0 in the date and another near the dentils by the first star. If these marks are raised, that would help identify the authenticity of this coin. The fields have a somewhat scuffed appearance, which on gold would require a number of bagmarks on the high points, but on this coin there appear to be none. The details on this coin are very good, but for detail that fine (like an MS-65) there should be much more luster and absolutely clear fields. On the reverse, the details are great, but the tail feathers on the eagle don't look right to me. There are a lot of excellent counterfeit double eagles around, especially the 1904 (which is the most common date of Type 3 double eagle, hence the easiest to pass since very few people scrutinize them as other dates). In fact, I bought a near perfect counterfeit 1904 double eagle from Germany about 2 years ago. I can't say for certain, but for me this one doesn't pass the "smell" test. I would advise either sending it to be certified, or taking it in person to a knowledgable dealer in your area for authentication. If the coin is fake, the good news is that most of the high quality fakes I've seen did contain the correct weight and fineness of gold (or at least very close), so at a minimum you have just under an ounce of gold. If any of you want to compare, I looked at this coin vs. my 1903 double eagle which is genuine and an MS-63. 1903 Obverse 1903 Reverse Yes I do agree this coin does look weird... do you happen to have an ounces scale that you might be able to weigh it on? It might also be whizzed and dipped that could explain the lack or ANY marks in the feilds where they should be. but without having this con in hand I could not tell you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtryka Posted October 11, 2005 Report Share Posted October 11, 2005 Thanks me and my friend a retired coindealer have been buying unslabbed coins in germany france spain etc and had them NGC slabbed So we are kind of calibrated to know what to expect We are obviously very very conservative because on average we are one to two units lower then the slabbed coins coming back from NGC and this means that all surprises in grade are allways good surprises My friend choose NGC for what seems very good reasons I still go with the motto Buy the coin not the slab In general, I've found that grading in Europe is much more conservative that it is in the US, so I am not surprised at your statements. Also, it's important to remember that gold coins are very difficult to accurately grade from photos as bag marks and minor hits to the surface are greatly amplified as compared to looking at the coin in hand. That is another reason why the 1904 double eagle which is the focus of this thread puzzles me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ageka Posted October 11, 2005 Report Share Posted October 11, 2005 Yes I do agree this coin does look weird... do you happen to have an ounces scale that you might be able to weigh it on? It might also be whizzed and dipped that could explain the lack or ANY marks in the feilds where they should be. but without having this con in hand I could not tell you. There is no lack of marks in the fields in fact there are marks on the 10 o'clock positiion of the obverse Also this may be one of those pseudo prooflike coins you see once in a while after they upgraded the polishing on their moulds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gpnyc Posted October 11, 2005 Report Share Posted October 11, 2005 I must echo what's already been said. The coin looks wrong to me. Its either not genuine or has been polished. Or both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmpearso Posted October 11, 2005 Report Share Posted October 11, 2005 Looks a lil too perfect...If it is real, very nice coin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ætheling Posted October 11, 2005 Report Share Posted October 11, 2005 My initial reaction is it looks too new! Sharper than i'd expect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2coins Posted October 11, 2005 Report Share Posted October 11, 2005 When I grade my own coins, I look at the detail of the coin first, then marks, then finnish, I say (By the photo) It appears to be around a MS63. As memtioned the coin would have to be in hand to realy varifiy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostDutchman Posted October 11, 2005 Report Share Posted October 11, 2005 Ok, here is a side by side..... Note the color....Unc gold coins have a very distinctive color...the coin posted for oppinions is not the right color. Coins that have been dipped or that have been cleaned in some other way show this color. I also can not see any luster...which is not a good sign...It might be the camera but I feel that this coin has been at least messed with if it is real. This coin should show bag marks....like morgan dollars these coins were loaded into bags with shovels and then thrown into the back of a horse drawn cart and moved to banks. Best advice I can tell you is send it into NGC and see what they have to say...the worst thing they can do is bodybag it and send it back to you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UncleBobo Posted October 11, 2005 Report Share Posted October 11, 2005 Coin Police.. I LOVE these types of discussions!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
28Plain Posted October 11, 2005 Report Share Posted October 11, 2005 Looks genuine but whizzed. May have been mounted in a bezel for awhile, hence the polishing. Bezel mounted coins often get the Fabuluster cloth treatment and the rouge in the cloth wipes away bag marks along with the luster that the bag marks were defacing. Luckily, the coin doesn't appear to have been 'power whizzed' on a wheel buff, but it still looks polished to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommyd Posted October 12, 2005 Report Share Posted October 12, 2005 I don't like the color -- you should definitely weigh it -- I hope you didn't acquire this piece from China... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccg Posted October 12, 2005 Report Share Posted October 12, 2005 I don't like the color -- you should definitely weigh it -- I hope you didn't acquire this piece from China... These Chinese AFAIK only make copies of silver coins. The most common "counterfeit" gold coins that I know of were from Lebanon in the 1950s and 60s, made for trade purposes. Those included US, UK, Canadian, among other commonly seen gold coins. All were struck in correct weight, and often of better fineness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bifrost Posted October 12, 2005 Author Report Share Posted October 12, 2005 Thanks for all the responce I have got I must say that the pictures I sent was not the best, as I have had some problems with the macro function on the camera. I have now taken some new pictures of the 20 dollar this time with a scanner. If you do not se the photo here is the link: http://hem.passagen.se/stockholms.myntklub...dollars1904.jpg I hope this will help. The coin weighs 33.4 grams and was bought at a noted scandinavian auction firm. I hope it is not a fake, as I like the coin. In Sweden were I live the higher grades are only EF, EF/Unc or Unc (in translation), and the opinion seems that no older gold coin can be Unc as the metall is to soft. This coin was graded EF by the auctionhouse, but as I can only se small and light scratches at the front but not any ones on the back I thought the grade must be higher and I think the grading here is a bit to consevative. It is also interesting to know the grade in US. as it is a coin from there. So MS63 seems to be the general opinion on quality? //Joakim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2coins Posted October 12, 2005 Report Share Posted October 12, 2005 The weight in the Red book says......33.436 grams. or..96750 Oz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2coins Posted October 12, 2005 Report Share Posted October 12, 2005 The Red book says the 1904 in MS63 (If it is real and a 63), lists the coin for $900.00 RAW, and has a very high mintage of 6,256.699 made and (98) Proofs made. That is just a near-about price.Hope that helps?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.