Jump to content
CoinPeople.com

Edge No 0 with grooves - The casting sign?


Recommended Posts

Dear community ;) ,

 

I got a coin where I have doubts on authenticity. Particularly, I don't like the edge. It should be the edge 0, plain edge, but instead of smooth surface, the edge has many grooves which go all the way around the coin.

 

edgepb5.th.jpg

 

Is this the sign of casting? :ninja: I have another coin of this type, plain edge is normal, as it should be.

 

Thanks! ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Dear community ;) ,

 

I got a coin where I have doubts on authenticity. Particularly, I don't like the edge. It should be the edge 0, plain edge, but instead of smooth surface, the edge has many grooves which go all the way around the coin.

 

edgepb5.th.jpg

 

Is this the sign of casting? :ninja: I have another coin of this type, plain edge is normal, as it should be.

 

Thanks! ;)

The edge could have been filed away -- many rare varieties of Nicholas II coins have a plain edge. If it is of that period, then the weight might give it away since normal weight is fairly consistent by that time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The edge could have been filed away -- many rare varieties of Nicholas II coins have a plain edge. If it is of that period, then the weight might give it away since normal weight is fairly consistent by that time.

 

Hi Bob ;)

 

No, this is a coin of Peter I :ninja:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Peter I? Sorry but I'm doubting it too.

 

Do you happen to have the pictures of the obverse and reverse? Thanks

 

Surely I have ;)

 

This is the quarter rouble 1705 we already discussed here:

 

http://www.coinpeople.com/index.php?showtopic=12105

 

where we had some fight with people making statements without explaining, so I did not want to provoke the people again :ninja:

 

Yes, this is the coin from the Gorny and Mosch auction, 153/6001. I found it to be fake and I'm returning it to the auctioneers. Only thorough analysis revealed this coin to be a fake.

 

First I wanted to post the topic under name "Quarter Rouble 1705 - Fake or genuine? Guidelines for numismatists" or "...mystery unveiled" ;) , with large comparative pictures of the fake and genuine coins and features you can use to spot a fake, but I did not want to provoke the community.

 

Greetings ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Wait a second - you mean that edge is for the 1705 polupoltinnik?! :ninja:

 

But for something that has aged 300 years+, I REALLY do expect the edge to be somewhat WORN, not groovy like the image suggests!

 

Yes, it's for the 1705 polupoltinnik from the G&M sale which several people suggested to be a fake. I have another, definitely authentic piece which is without a dot between "polupoL" and "btinnik" and have a normal edge, just plain, somewhat worn, but without any grooves. Unfortunately, I have already sold it ;) , now the piece from the G&M will travel back to G&M and I will try on the next sale to get something good for my collection ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dear community :

I got a coin where I have doubts on authenticity. Particularly, I don't like the edge. It should be the edge 0, plain edge, but instead of smooth surface, the edge has many grooves which go all the way around the coin.

Is this the sign of casting? :ninja: I have another coin of this type, plain edge is normal, as it should be.

Thanks!

 

One suggestion of the origin might be in the way certain large modern medals are made. A three-inch (76 mm) medal, for example, is struck several times but not in a collar. The struck piece is placed in a lathe and the excess metal on the edge trimmed to the proper size. The illustration shown by kisenish has marks similar to those made by a lathe (although much cruder) and perhaps, if this piece is bad, was made that way.

 

RWJ

Link to post
Share on other sites
The illustration shown by kisenish has marks similar to those made by a lathe (although much cruder) and perhaps, if this piece is bad, was made that way.

 

RWJ

 

Yes, but I think it was made this way (by a lathe) not in the 18th century ;) How was the procedure for the polupoltinniks 1705?

 

I think this coin is a modern counterfeit, especially if everything matches the exemplar published as a fake in the JRNS 77, p.46. Even the displacement of dies matches completely - dot in dot. They are also identically bent.

This coin is either from the fake dies made from an original coin (with such die displacement, that's why all "clones" are completely the same) or a cast fake - in this case you also get fully identical "clones". Am I right?

 

This particular coin exhibits exactly the features suggested previously by Rarenum for identification of fakes, namely:

1. Dots on circle close to the edge of fake coin look like wide line or wide dots.

2. Edge (#0) looks like oval because harshly cleaned.

 

It's in preparation for travel back to G&M along with my expertise. :ninja:

Link to post
Share on other sites
This coin is either from the fake dies made from an original coin (with such die displacement, that's why all "clones" are completely the same) or a cast fake

 

Did you "ring" it? That would show you whether it was a cast copy or not...

Link to post
Share on other sites

kisenish,

 

Were you able to contact Mr. Gorny to ask for return of the coin and refund? I am wondering what you were told? Also I am very interested to find who was consignor of this coin (but most likely will never find out). I suggest you look on another GM auction #143 lot 5983A. What do you think?

 

Once you get a refund please let the community know. This may be beneficial for many people who occasionally buys from GM.

 

Best,

WCO

Link to post
Share on other sites
kisenish,

 

Were you able to contact Mr. Gorny to ask for return of the coin and refund? I am wondering what you were told? Also I am very interested to find who was consignor of this coin (but most likely will never find out). I suggest you look on another GM auction #143 lot 5983A. What do you think?

 

Once you get a refund please let the community know. This may be beneficial for many people who occasionally buys from GM.

 

Best,

WCO

 

O yes, I called them today, they were more than happy :ninja: Actually, it is not necessary to contact Mr. Gorny personally, I called the office and an employee gave me instructions how to send the coin back.

Most importantly, you should explain the reasons for returning, but for this coin it is not a problem, especially if it is published. Surely, I will go all the way through analysis of details and comparative pictures, it's not a problem for me, as I'm a scientist - it's like writing a paper ;)

 

Fully identical "clones" / alledgedly fakes were sold by G&M at least twice - these are 123/4001 and 143/5983A. Actually, it is a sad situation since you don't know what you get even from a reputable source - you should be a specialist by yourself

Link to post
Share on other sites
Fully identical "clones" / alledgedly fakes were sold by G&M at least twice - these are 123/4001 and 143/5983A.

 

No, even 3 times - also 127/5336.

 

These coins appeared at the G&M auctions first in 2003, thus, it's in accordance with the information from Rarenum that these fakes were spot from 2001 on.

Link to post
Share on other sites
No, even 3 times - also 127/5336.

 

These coins appeared at the G&M auctions first in 2003, thus, it's in accordance with the information from Rarenum that these fakes were spot from 2001 on.

 

They (GM) sold similar fakes several times already. I did not dig that much deep in time as you did but that 143/5983A was definitely a fake. Also seems for me that these were all "consigned" by a single "source".

 

 

WCO

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
kisenish,

 

Were you able to contact Mr. Gorny to ask for return of the coin and refund?

Once you get a refund please let the community know. This may be beneficial for many people who occasionally buys from GM.

 

Best,

WCO

 

As WCO asked, I would like to tell the community the happy-end of this story. Just now I finally got the refund for this fake :ninja: Only the costs of shipping the coin back to GM were non-refundable (4 Euro), but I think this is a good price for the knowledge I gained by performing an extensive research on these coins. As WCO states in his signature - "Knowledge is power" ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you, kisenish for the follow up. I am glad there was no problem.

WCO

 

Well...there is a problem ! Huge problem ! I'm pretty sure that those prominent dealers know what they sell. I can not imagine that Mr. Gorny or Baron (most recent case) had no idea that they are selling fakes.

Don't you think this is a huge problem ?!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well...there is a problem ! Huge problem ! I'm pretty sure that those prominent dealers know what they sell. I can not imagine that Mr. Gorny or Baron (most recent case) had no idea that they are selling fakes.

Don't you think this is a huge problem ?!

 

 

What is it about the Baron coin that leads you to believe that it is also a fake? :ninja:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well...there is a problem ! Huge problem ! I'm pretty sure that those prominent dealers know what they sell. I can not imagine that Mr. Gorny or Baron (most recent case) had no idea that they are selling fakes.

Don't you think this is a huge problem ?!

 

 

Mr. Z.

 

Welcome to the forum.

 

There is no proof that Mr. Gorny has ever seen that coin. Even if he used to see it, then there is no proof that he inspected it himself. And even he inspected it himself, there is no proof that he became aware about it being a fake. For a dealer of his size benefits of selling this coin (if it sells) are minor, and loss of reputation and business overall may be huge once found out that their company was deliberately selling fakes. So unlike you, I would not be accusing them of a "major crime", i.e. deliberate sales of fakes. While there certainly is a "smaller crime" - luck of thorough expertise of coinage put for auction.

 

 

WCO

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well...there is a problem ! Huge problem ! I'm pretty sure that those prominent dealers know what they sell. I can not imagine that Mr. Gorny or Baron (most recent case) had no idea that they are selling fakes.

Don't you think this is a huge problem ?!

 

I think they are not big specialists on this field, and, whether they guarantee the authenticity or not, you are always supposed to look by yourself. Surely, it would be good to be able to rely on them, but unfortunately it's not the case. They even don't always write about field polishing / mount marks. That's why I try to see all the coins I want to bid on in person. Some coins looking nice in catalogs are in real very ugly tooled / polished pieces. That's IMHO at least non-professonal.

 

Concerning other auctions, it's even worse. Sometimes I see there very obvious fakes (e.g. Siberian coinage of 1764 and other "rarities") you can buy on eBay for 1-2 Euro. It means, they have no idea how coins should look like. In this case, IMHO, they should not be allowed to make auctions, if they don't know what they sell. :ninja:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...