Think this NEWP has a case of Ringworm

[collectinsince65]

Normally this time of year on a Sunday afternoon I'd be watching March Madness. Or possibly the PGA. Nope not this year with that nasty virus in the lurks. Everything canceled. So on this past Sunday I started thinking about some of my favorite VAM's to search for. I opened up my copy of VAMView. And began flipping thru it. I decided to seek out this variety. It only took about a dozen rocks to flip over and there she was! Just landed today.

1896-o vam pcgs au 55 rev 2 crop 2 - Shortcut.jpg (258.43 KiB) Viewed 438 times

1896-o vam pcgs au 55 rev 2 crop 2 - Shortcut.jpg (258.43 KiB) Viewed 438 times

1896-o vam pcgs au55 rev (2).jpg (175.21 KiB) Viewed 429 times

[vampicker]

Not 22

[lured_in_again]

I know they are not the best to use for VAMming, but the die cracks through UNITED sure do look like a match to the smaller photos on the 22 page... misplaced photos? Also looks like they match the very light cracks @ UNI in the large full photo bottom of 22 page. Same reverse as another VAM ??

[vampicker]

OK, now I want to see more pictures.
Thing that threw me is the profile looks far too strong. There's an ongoing debate about these.

[collectinsince65]

Here's an image I thought I had added last night

[collectinsince65]

And here are images of a sister coin

1896 o rev ringworm vss attributted PCGS AU 53.png (230.44 KiB) Viewed 362 times

1896 o rev LAR of DOLLAR.png (151.09 KiB) Viewed 362 times

1896 o rev die cracks at UNTITED.png (221.49 KiB) Viewed 362 times

1896 o rev.png (1.15 MiB) Viewed 362 times

[vampicker]

So I'm at a point where the ones with the reverse crack pattern look like they might be genuine while the ones without these cracks look fake.

[LateDateMorganGuy]

For what it's worth, and likely not worth much, the die pair comes with and without the cracks. Both with cracks and without cracks have the same beveled fields on both obverse and reverse.

Here are my notes from reviewing over 1256 coins in AU50 and up in grade.

"The primary characteristics of this die pair that leads to the Privately Made VAM listing are the rounded edges where the main devices meet the field on both obverse and reverse dies, and die casting flaws. I have the following observations.

1. The VAM-22 is found in UNC and AU grades on a regular basis in NGC, PCGS and ANACS holders. This is uncommon for the Privately Made Morgan silver dollars. As a matter of fact, the number of coins I saw in UNC and AU matches just about every other die pair found in higher grades. As such, they are not exactly rare.

2. There are other obverse and reverse dies in the 1896-O Morgan dollar series that show rounded edges of the main devices where they meet the fields. While not as pronounced as the VAM-22, many dies show the same, but weaker characteristic.

3. If the 1896 coin used as the base cast for the counterfeit die had PMD, these die markers would have transferred to the cast die, and be present on all VAM-22 coins. I could not locate repeating die cast flaws in the coins I reviewed. The exception might be the “raised circle” below the E in AMERICA. However, this could merely a thread-like impression.

While none of the points above is conclusive, I believe the issue of the VAM-22 die pair being a Privately Made coin is open for further study and discussion."

Here is a link to a AU58 example.

https://images.pcgs.com/CoinFacts/21815 ... 9_2200.jpg

[vampicker]

The stage illustrated by the AU 58 example linked above is similar to the discovery piece. It's a weird looking coin in hand.

[vampicker]

It's also worth noting that for several years now, I've compared the edge reeding of the discovery piece to multiple examples of clearly genuine examples of the date. I've yet to find a definitive match for the collar used on the discovery piece, but there have been several that qualify as pretty darn close. The reed count is correct at 181 reeds. Don't ever recall doing an edge comparison of a raw VAM 22 with the cracks illustrated in the original post to my example.

[collectinsince65]

Great post and study @LateDateMorganGuy . Thank you for sharing your knowledge on this.


@vampicker JR I have 2 in hand raw and a 3rd on the way (fine to xf) that I could send to you.

Mike

[vampicker]

I have the discovery piece on my desk as we speak. It's AU 55ish. I could use an AU+ example with the crack pattern on the reverse for that edge comparison I was talking about.
I appreciate the offer, but like Alan has done, I've also looked for matching depressions. It's been years now, and I've looked at dozens of examples. No smoking gun like the divot on the Micro O's.
I'll post some pics of the stuff that really bothers me about the piece.

[vampicker]

Look at the lines in the R of LIBERTY, indistinct dots instead of solid lines. Suggests it's copied

[vampicker]

Same sort of thing at the cap fold

[vampicker]

odd lumps in the D gap instead of lines

[vampicker]

Looks like a die crack from lower left of 8

[vampicker]

Apparent faint die crack from edge thru tip of U to S of PLURIBUS. Note odd texture of surrounding fields

[vampicker]

the weak profile

[vampicker]

and gotta show that nasty old ringworm

[LateDateMorganGuy]

John, does this link to a NGC 61 example help? Note the much stronger die scratches below Liberty's capfold.

https://coins.ha.com/itm/morgan-dollars ... ion-071515#