By Jack D. Young, Early American Coppers (EAC), and the Dark Side Group ……
I had the opportunity to participate in The Coin Show’s Live “Mega Hangout” on Saturday, December 23, 2023, and in it I mentioned how the counterfeiters continue to mix and match obverse and reverse dies to make new counterfeits, and that I had seen a new dollar variety just that week.
The “coin” I mentioned was an 1874-S Trade Dollar; the obverse matches exactly the one used for known counterfeit 1874-CC Trades Dollars in fake “PCGS” holders.
And even in these documented “CC”s, there are two different reverses used!
The seller listed the “S” example twice, but it ended both times, so it’s still out there somewhere…
The next images are of the two known counterfeit 1874-CC Trade Dollars.
These two share a common obverse but use two different reverses, as seen in the mint mark:
The new “S Variety” uses a different reverse but the same obverse; many obvious common marks between them!
The new reverse has a number of interesting markers that may be used for other similar fakes:
Just a note, I have NOT found this counterfeit reverse in any current internet searches!
And the “twist”?
Taking a quick spin on the internet after the ball dropped, I found not only my first fake of 2024 but also another undocumented (by me, anyway) counterfeit dollar variety.
The seller had actually listed it and then revised the images and price; I saved the best images available from the two.
As a reference, I wrote a fourth CoinWeek “Family Counterfeit” article previously, one based on the 1799 B-10/BB-163 Large Eagle reverse dollar. Both obverses and reverses matched for all the different dated coins in that group, ranging from 1798 to 1804.
This latest example uses a different obverse, and it’s the first time that I’ve seen a counterfeit 1802/1, but it still appears to use the 1799 reverse.
Pictures are just good enough to see the fake date is a pretty good attempt on this one. But again, the reverse doesn’t match any of the genuine varieties known!
Images as included follow: an obverse comparison to the closest genuine 1802/1 variety BB-232, and an image comparison to the genuine 1799 BB-163 reverse.
I can’t stress enough how important ATTRIBUTION is in these evaluations; I consider it the first line of defense against the growing number of counterfeit varieties.
The bad 1802/1 listing was ended with no sale; unfortunately, the seller had another example also listed. Images were worse for this one, but it’s still clear that it’s yet another bad apple.
This listing was ended as well, but it’s just a matter of time before we see them again!
Best as always,
* * *