bobh Posted January 21, 2008 Report Share Posted January 21, 2008 http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=170185724884 The edge and the obverse look OK, but I don't like the look of the letters in "ПЯТЬ КОПѢЕКЪ". What do you think ... is it genuine or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STEVE MOULDING Posted January 21, 2008 Report Share Posted January 21, 2008 Looks OK to me, Bob. The lettering on the 1796AMs was not as tidy as it could have been . Here's another example: Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NumisMattic2200 Posted January 21, 2008 Report Share Posted January 21, 2008 I find it interesting how many of these are fakes or have to be disputed if they are fakes - here is one I got recently off ebay and posted about a week ago on CoinCommunity. What are your thoughts about this one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STEVE MOULDING Posted January 21, 2008 Report Share Posted January 21, 2008 I find it interesting how many of these are fakes or have to be disputed if they are fakes - here is one I got recently off ebay and posted about a week ago on CoinCommunity. What are your thoughts about this one? Thanks for providing such nice images! This one feels like a cast copy to me. How is the edge? Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NumisMattic2200 Posted January 21, 2008 Report Share Posted January 21, 2008 It has a crossy sort of x-pattern, I am not expert trust me. Sap posted on CC about it being a Swedish fake produced at the same time (comtemporary fake) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STEVE MOULDING Posted January 21, 2008 Report Share Posted January 21, 2008 It has a crossy sort of x-pattern, I am not expert trust me. Sap posted on CC about it being a Swedish fake produced at the same time (comtemporary fake) Ah. No. The Swedish (Avesta) fakes are another matter entirely. They are easily recognizable and only carry the dates 1764, 1778, and 1787. They're very rare and very expensive. This is not one of them. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobh Posted January 21, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2008 Thanks for providing such nice images! This one feels like a cast copy to me. How is the edge? Steve Now why would anyone bother to fake such a common date? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted January 21, 2008 Report Share Posted January 21, 2008 Bobh, that 1789AM looks ok. The 1790 EM looks ok too, and note that it has some double struck detail on the obverse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NumisMattic2200 Posted January 21, 2008 Report Share Posted January 21, 2008 The 'fakeness' of my coin was actually disputed on CC so it is a little uncertain and mysterious (just making it look positive there) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STEVE MOULDING Posted January 21, 2008 Report Share Posted January 21, 2008 Now why would anyone bother to fake such a common date? A good question that I've been asking myself lately!! I've seen several EM fakes from the 1790s recently that have the tell-tale ring around the edge. I've also seen two identical fake 1793EM 5K overstrikes that had the edge smoothed away completely to hide the join. I don't why they'd fake the more common coins...practice? People will be less inclined to check if it's common? Maybe. But we are seeing them these days. Check those edges Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gxseries Posted January 21, 2008 Report Share Posted January 21, 2008 Steve, in my opinion, I do believe it's cleaned and definately double struck - about 10 degrees ish. I would be VERY troubled to believe if it's actually a counterfeit but let's see the edge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STEVE MOULDING Posted January 21, 2008 Report Share Posted January 21, 2008 Steve, in my opinion, I do believe it's cleaned and definately double struck - about 10 degrees ish. I would be VERY troubled to believe if it's actually a counterfeit but let's see the edge. You're probably right . The double striking may have altered the definition and details of the wreath leaves for example, and I'm probably overly sensitive after the recent batch of EM fakes. Still, I'd also like to see the edge. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigistenz Posted January 24, 2008 Report Share Posted January 24, 2008 I find it interesting how many of these are fakes or have to be disputed if they are fakes - here is one I got recently off ebay and posted about a week ago on CoinCommunity. What are your thoughts about this one? Hi, I have been collecting the large Russian copper coins for 30 years. I also have seen cast fakes. This coin seems to be genuine. I would not hesitate to bid on it. What makes you think that it is fake? Please let us see the edge of the coin, as others asked you already. Thank you, Sigi P.S.: bobh, I think the coin you posted was also OK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NumisMattic2200 Posted January 24, 2008 Report Share Posted January 24, 2008 Hi again Sigi, after your message asking for photos of the edge - just took these tonight... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NumisMattic2200 Posted January 24, 2008 Report Share Posted January 24, 2008 In the last photo - is that the tell-tale ring around the edge I've just read about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexbq2 Posted January 24, 2008 Report Share Posted January 24, 2008 In the last photo - is that the tell-tale ring around the edge I've just read about? I am in no way an expert, which probably explains why I don't see anything suspect about this coin. Could you please elaborate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nordic gold Posted January 24, 2008 Report Share Posted January 24, 2008 To me this coin looks as original as can be. It even has a slanting edge in places which as far as I know never is present in the cast copies but is a typical charasteristics in some of the originals. The edge ring in the cast copies goes round the whole coin and is located more or less in the middle - no such thing here. In the edge pattern there can be noticed some remains of cleaning powder. It seems the coin has sometime ago been cleaned, but fortunately only very slightly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigistenz Posted January 24, 2008 Report Share Posted January 24, 2008 I am in no way an expert, which probably explains why I don't see anything suspect about this coin. Could you please elaborate? Thanks for the great pictures! Your coin is absolutely OK, genuine. It is double struck, i.e. the coin was not ejected before the system hit again. The traces of the 1st strike are evident. Keep on - buy more of these, it's fun (but take care - you may get addicted as I am). Regards, Sigi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NumisMattic2200 Posted January 24, 2008 Report Share Posted January 24, 2008 I am in no way an expert, which probably explains why I don't see anything suspect about this coin. Could you please elaborate? Elaborate?! you mean you want another non-expert to tell you what he already doesn't know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NumisMattic2200 Posted January 24, 2008 Report Share Posted January 24, 2008 Thanks for the great pictures! Your coin is absolutely OK, genuine. It is double struck, i.e. the coin was not ejected before the system hit again. The traces of the 1st strike are evident. Keep on - buy more of these, it's fun (but take care - you may get addicted as I am). Regards, Sigi Is this a common thing for coins of this era? And how much do you think it would be worth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NumisMattic2200 Posted January 24, 2008 Report Share Posted January 24, 2008 Also, as I don't know much about Russian coins of this era, can someone tell me why some of the letters are missing on this coin? Were they just knocked off at some point in their storage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigistenz Posted January 25, 2008 Report Share Posted January 25, 2008 Is this a common thing for coins of this era? And how much do you think it would be worth? Double strikes occurred frequently. Most collectors would however prefer a specimen struck just once as it looks more esthetic. A matter of taste. The type of coin is quite common. The date 1790 and the E.M. mint are not scarce. I'd value this one between $20 - $50 .... You know much depends on who is watching and competing at eBay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NumisMattic2200 Posted January 25, 2008 Report Share Posted January 25, 2008 Oh yeah.. it's getting them to notice your listings and bid when your stuff is selling that's the problem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.