Cheburgen Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 Is it fake? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheburgen Posted July 22, 2013 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 Or it's genuine? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BKB Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 do not like it, and I am not alone... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheburgen Posted July 24, 2013 Author Report Share Posted July 24, 2013 Don't like it too. I think the genuine 3 kopecks (different year) used to produce this. I just thinking which year. 1907 perhaps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BKB Posted July 24, 2013 Report Share Posted July 24, 2013 could be an alteration. But, could be those fake dies made from 07 and then changed to press this thing. Stupid grading services that slab fakes, but won't give a grade to an original that has "excessive hairlines" Wonder if someone buys it... Will be another "lucky" guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted July 24, 2013 Report Share Posted July 24, 2013 sister forum says that "7" is altered Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted July 26, 2013 Report Share Posted July 26, 2013 Nice fake, if you can say that about fake. I don't like the stars. Other than that, just by looking at the pictures, I can not find much difference from the real coins of other years, so I guess I would be fooled by it. Edge examination is a must in these coins. You can not do this in slabbed coins, unless a special slab is used. I wouldn't risk anything over $100. Â It looks different from the common fakes: Â Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IgorS Posted July 27, 2013 Report Share Posted July 27, 2013 I am planning to see it in Chicago next month. Also will discuss it with some experts there. Will report after. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gxseries Posted July 27, 2013 Report Share Posted July 27, 2013 Have no opinion but altering this could be a lot harder - the date is indented so unless parts of the zero has been filled in, I think it's quite difficult. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted July 27, 2013 Report Share Posted July 27, 2013 sister forum says that "7" is altered What grounds do they use for passing this judgement? I can not see the signs of alteration. May be missing something... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted July 27, 2013 Report Share Posted July 27, 2013 if you read carefully the whole thread there (sister forum), they have a proof that this is a fake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted July 27, 2013 Report Share Posted July 27, 2013 Can I please have a link? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EugeneG Posted July 28, 2013 Report Share Posted July 28, 2013 Can I please have a link? http://www.staraya-moneta.ru/forum/messages/forum15/topic39833/message341685/#message341685 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted July 28, 2013 Report Share Posted July 28, 2013 EugeneG, thank you for the link! Â This picture, to compare coin in question to 3 k from Kazakov had a different effect on me: Â Â Â It actually showed me that my original suspicion based on star shapes is not substantiated. They do look the same. Â Due to toning and light / photo effect, the 7-s look somewhat different, but, again, I would not draw the line, and would blame that very unprofessional toning and light combination for ambiguous look. One should examine it "live" before passing a final judgement. Â To see a picture of "matochnik" was a nice touch: Â Â Â Resume: it's very possible that coin in the slab is original. The opposite statement may be true as well. It still needs proper expert opinion of a "live" coin, not just multiple judgements of pictures... As I mentioned before, I, for one, would be fooled, just using pictures. Â IgorS, you'll need to bring a good magnifying glass to Chicago next month. Hold my breath until than... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyal Citizen Posted July 29, 2013 Report Share Posted July 29, 2013 ...... IgorS, you'll need to bring a good magnifying glass to Chicago next month. Hold my breath until than... Â I don't think it is necessary. It is obviously not what the auction's catalog says. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timofei Posted July 29, 2013 Report Share Posted July 29, 2013 Â I don't think it is necessary. It is obviously not what the auction's catalog says. I second your opinion. We have 2 pictures of 2 different original dies that are kept in the Hermitage museum and St Petersburg mint museum plus the image of the Kazakov catalogue coin. Â Stack's coin does not match. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted July 31, 2013 Report Share Posted July 31, 2013 Â Â Which two look more alike (from top to bottom)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobh Posted July 31, 2013 Report Share Posted July 31, 2013 3 K stars 1916-1917.jpg  Which two look more alike (from top to bottom)?  The first and third images look very similar (stars), but the third is slightly rotated (0.5 ~ 1.0 degree) with respect to the first. I would say that the second image is very different than either the 1st or 3rd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted July 31, 2013 Report Share Posted July 31, 2013 That kind of settles it for me. The first image from original design ("matochnik") of 1917 3 kopecks, the second one is from the coin in question, and the third one is from a randomly sellected 1916 3 kopecks. They all are slightly different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted August 1, 2013 Report Share Posted August 1, 2013 7 is the bingo not 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted August 1, 2013 Report Share Posted August 1, 2013 7 may be a bingo, but the coin is not a re-cut from 1916 as some implied... and examining the stars a little closer tells me that the coin is not from 1917 design, but also, not very likely that it's from 1916 coins... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted August 1, 2013 Report Share Posted August 1, 2013 stars i would not consider it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted August 1, 2013 Report Share Posted August 1, 2013 I like your input, but it's always rather short... can you elaborate? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BKB Posted August 2, 2013 Report Share Posted August 2, 2013 7 may be a bingo, but the coin is not a re-cut from 1916 as some implied... and examining the stars a little closer tells me that the coin is not from 1917 design, but also, not very likely that it's from 1916 coins... 1907? Would be a very logical step -- everyone immediately examines the 7, forgetting about 1... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STEVE MOULDING Posted August 2, 2013 Report Share Posted August 2, 2013 The seven is the wrong shape for a 1907. So unlikely to be 1907-->1917. If it is altered, my money would be on a 191* --> 1917 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.