
If you’re ever sorting through your pocket change and come up with a quarter that resembles the one depicted to the left, you might want to turn it in to the authorities. It’s counterfeit. A knowledgeable American coin collector could tell this with only a quick glance; but how?
tsssss…. burned by numismatic irony again!
posted by Gonzo on 3-5-2009 at 7:40 am
I call shenanigans todays shouldnt fall under a brain game! This should be more of the useless fact for trivia section!
posted by Jrod on 3-5-2009 at 8:16 am
It’s always fun when I’m right – and wrong.
I knew it was a counterfeit right away not from the year but because it doesn’t have that little letter (i.e. “D”) to the right of the image. That little letter tells where the coin was minted.
posted by Josh on 3-5-2009 at 8:50 am
I came to the same conclusion as Josh. And I second the shenanigans!
posted by RTA on 3-5-2009 at 8:59 am
For the same reason that you don’t see a 1983 Corvette.
posted by Kev in GA on 3-5-2009 at 9:10 am
The lack of a mintmark (P, D or S) to the right of the portrait does not necessarily indicate that the quarter is a counterfeit. The Philadelphia mint did not start using a mintmark until 1980. In addition, the mint did not use any mintmarks on coins dated 1965 through 1967. On silver quarters dated up to 1964, the mintmark is found on the reverse for coins minted in Denver or San Francisco (Philadelphia did not use a mintmark).
posted by Victor D. Brenner on 3-5-2009 at 9:17 am
@ Josh: Coins minted in Philadelphia have no marking. And older coins minted in San Francisco have a ‘S’
posted by Mike on 3-5-2009 at 9:19 am
the “D” stands for denver. there are mints in philadelphia(no letter) and san francisco(the letter S)as well as fort knox and west point, ny that specialize and HQ is in DC.
posted by lisa on 3-5-2009 at 9:21 am
Back then (1975), Philadelphia coins didn’t show any mint mark at all, since it was the “original” mint. “D” and “S” were used back then, but “P” wasn’t added until the 1980s.
posted by Sandy Wood on 3-5-2009 at 9:55 am
I thought it was the lack of ridges around the edge of the coin.
posted by jason on 3-5-2009 at 10:46 am
I agree with Jason–I thought it was the ridges!
posted by Ophelia on 3-5-2009 at 12:27 pm
Wow, that is strange I have 2 of them in my coins right now.
Uh-oh! Maybe I should not have said that.
posted by Jeffrey on 3-5-2009 at 5:30 pm