Rotten Rodney Posted February 28, 2006 Report Share Posted February 28, 2006 I was Wondering if it could be ( forgive me for Suggesting this.) Counterfeit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Sisu Posted February 28, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2006 Here is a different shot of the area above the bird: And here is a close up of the text at the bottom of the coin: strange looking "bubbles" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted March 1, 2006 Report Share Posted March 1, 2006 The more photographs you produce, the more anamolies appear. I would really want to examine three or four of these side by side to understand what's going on if the coin is genuine. The striations around the head of the eagle don't look right. The surface texture of the field above the eagle's head doesn't look right. The raised areas that I thought were clash marks, still look like such, but they should be incuse now that I see the side shot. The raised areas at the base also remind me a clash marks, but again they are raised. The other option would be that the piece is struck on a previous coin and you see the remains of the host. But, that doesn't explain the details around the head, the surface texture, or the bubbles in the points around the rim (look below the S and the P). Interestingly, the doubling in the letters at the top indicate a half way decent cast if it is cast. Without the coin in hand and without knowing what other pieces look like, I would have to say a cast piece based on the traits visible in your latest images. The granularity along the rim and in the fine incised lines along the rim can't be a die struck product unles the die was rusty, in really bad shaped, and poorly polished before being used to strike the coin. All a possibility, but I suspect highly unlikely in the 1950s. Where did you buy this piece? Any possibility it comes from China? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
errorist Posted March 1, 2006 Report Share Posted March 1, 2006 The flaking coin is a lamination error. The other coin is a die polishing error. An overzelous die polisher got to involved with that die. I don't see any design on the reverse that resembles that pattern on the front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ætheling Posted March 1, 2006 Report Share Posted March 1, 2006 As i said way back on this thread. I'm afraid to say i think you've got some cast copies there. The question i have been dying to ask is how are the edges? (I.e does it look like excess metal has been filed off?) I've seen alot of fake £1 coins in change and these coins you picture have the same kind of distinguishing marks that the quids have. 1) The raised bumps (could be from a die breaking up, but i doubt it, as there's just so much going on with that coin). 2) The unnatural lustre 3) The wear looks more like weakness of strike, weakness of strike perhaps due to lack of pressure? Or perhaps minimal to no pressure as you'd get with a cast coin. 4) The legends at the bottom right appeared to have parallel lines on the top surface, as might be seen on Chinese cash coinage. 5) But the biggest piece of evidence that everyone has overlooked is that you have three of them all the same. One coin with 'errors' like this then maybe, but three? They would all have had to have come from the same die set and have been together since they left the mint. And the chances of that are? (Unless they're producing all their coins from knackered dies) Realistically i smell a dead rat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Sisu Posted March 1, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 1, 2006 The question i have been dying to ask is how are the edges? (I.e does it look like excess metal has been filed off?) The edges are actually intact. Too intact IMO. Usually with coins that have lots of lustre remaining, the edges are usually somewhat toned/darkened from people hold them by the edges. This one is completely shiny on the edges. I've seen alot of fake £1 coins in change and these coins you picture have the same kind of distinguishing marks that the quids have. 5) But the biggest piece of evidence that everyone has overlooked is that you have three of them all the same. One coin with 'errors' like this then maybe, but three? They would all have had to have come from the same die set and have been together since they left the mint. And the chances of that are? (Unless they're producing all their coins from knackered dies) Sorry if I have not been clear on this. ALL the images are of the same coin except the 200 mark posted by bill of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ætheling Posted March 1, 2006 Report Share Posted March 1, 2006 The edges are actually intact. Too intact IMO. Usually with coins that have lots of lustre remaining, the edges are usually somewhat toned/darkened from people hold them by the edges. This one is completely shiny on the edges. I've seen alot of fake £1 coins in change and these coins you picture have the same kind of distinguishing marks that the quids have. Sorry if I have not been clear on this. ALL the images are of the same coin except the 200 mark posted by bill of course. No i realise that they are on the same coin. However i'm sure you said you'd bought three of these coins and they were all a bit suspect if not necessarily the same. (If they were all exactly the same then they'd be from the same die set), if they are all showing similar problems but are not identical then it means the mint they're from (if real) are using some real dud dies. They couldn't all be errors (well they could, but i'd think it unlikely) is what i meant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ætheling Posted March 1, 2006 Report Share Posted March 1, 2006 Sorry ignore that above, you said the third coin was okay, but the first two were a bit flakey. I'm with you now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Sisu Posted March 1, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 1, 2006 ...Where did you buy this piece? Any possibility it comes from China? I purchased these from a US seller. Where they acquired them I have no idea. I voiced my concerns with the seller immidiately -even before I posted this thread- and suggested that they examine that avenue more closely. I have purchased from this person before with no problems. And I was immidiately offered a full refund ( minus shipping) and to keep the coins -no hassles whatsoever. I am just now trying to determine whether these are tampered coins, fakes, or just perhaps strange looking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Sisu Posted March 1, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 1, 2006 Sorry ignore that above, you said the third coin was okay, but the first two were a bit flakey. I'm with you now. The second coin was a different coin altogether also. However, it has the same kind of over-lustrous shine to it like the peso, with no flaking though. It is a Chinese dollar: Obverse Reverse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ætheling Posted March 1, 2006 Report Share Posted March 1, 2006 Second M in MEMENTO is a bit blurred other than that i can't really say as i have never seen one of these before. Incidentally the H in Birth appears to be doubled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Sisu Posted March 14, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 14, 2006 Best thing you can do with these coins of yours is to weight them and check against what they should weigh. Probably the best determining factor when it comes to circumstances like these. If the weight is light by a gram or so, then they are fakes. If the weight is more or less spot on then it is more likely than not that the coins are genuine but struck using dirty or damaged dies at the very end of their life cycle. I finally got my more precise scale working. Krause lists it as 25.00g and it weighs 25.42g. Is that within normal deviation or could that support my "plating/painting" theory? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josemartins Posted March 14, 2006 Report Share Posted March 14, 2006 Well, i'm still going with "Lacquer job" for coin number one! For the "memento" restrike (the dies for these were used to the limit, so variations occur), i would say that, if the coin has the right weight (or around that), smells like silver and do not have rough edges, then its OK. Jose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.