| Author |
 Replies: 16 / Views: 3,357 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Singapore
631 Posts |
I have seen fakes of these type, the weight doesn't match. I might have bought one a while back.
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
295 Posts |
I'll have to order another scale but I'll update with the results once I'm able to. I've detected several counterfeit silver coins by weight before, but this ends up being fake, it's much better than the ones I've encountered previously.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1915 Posts |
I have coins like this in my collection of fakes, but not this date.
Based on the date, I'd guess if this coin was tested for weight, measures and specific gravity, it is probably not genuine.
I've often thought that this forum could benefit by having some means for one member to submit a coin for testing to another member and then have those results posted.
Members may come across a suspect coin or two from time to time, but don't desire to spend the money, or otherwise have the means to detect fakes.
|
|
Valued Member
Netherlands
176 Posts |
It is indeed not listed in KM. The last silver one listed is dated 1937 and is of type KM17.2. You5 1938 one is of the earlier type KM17.1. This type has the A mintmark of Paris. I checked my copy of Monnaies Francaises Colonies 1670-1942 and Metropole 1774-1942 by V.G. Here it is stated that of the 20 centimes with year 1937, 6.116.418 pieces were struck (VG 5453). Also in 1937, 11.383.582 pieces were struck with the date 1938 (VG 5490). Added together this gives a mintage of 17.5 million, the number quoted by KM. So there seems to be an error in KM as the coins bearing the date 1938 are not listed separately.
|
|
Valued Member
Netherlands
176 Posts |
I tried to find an other specimen with date 1938 using google but could not find any. Also I consulted the catalog Monnaies Coloniales Francaises 1670 - 1988 by V. Gadoury and G. Cousinie. There the 1938 date is not listed, only 1937. The mintage is given as 17,500,000 (6,110,413). Not exactly clear what this means. Perhaps 6,110,413 of the total minted in 1937. Perhaps V.G. = V. Guilloteau is not correct and should have stated that the coin was also minted in 1938 but with date 1937!
There also is an essai (trial) with year 1937 and mintmark A. So your coin perhaps is also an, unlisted essai. The coin looks genuine to me. An intriguing piece!
|
|
Valued Member
United States
295 Posts |
Thanks all for the replies. This is an intriguing specimen indeed. I tried shining a light through the small hole on the top and the metal inside looks yellowish. So maybe it's silver-plated brass. I will have to check weight and specific gravity when my scale gets here. I may also get some neodymium magnets to do a magnet test on this later.
What strikes me as especially odd about this piece is that the toning pattern looks so similar to a lot of my silver coins. Is it possible for a silver-plated counterfeit to tone like this?
|
|
Moderator
 Australia
16868 Posts |
Quote:
Also in 1937, 11.383.582 pieces were struck with the date 1938 (VG 5490). Added together this gives a mintage of 17.5 million, the number quoted by KM. So there seems to be an error in KM as the coins bearing the date 1938 are not listed separately.
There the 1938 date is not listed, only 1937. The mintage is given as 17,500,000 (6,110,413). Not exactly clear what this means. Perhaps 6,110,413 of the total minted in 1937. Perhaps V.G. = V. Guilloteau is not correct and should have stated that the coin was also minted in 1938 but with date 1937!That would be my interpretation of what is presented in the catalogues: coins are only dated 1937; 6 million of these were actually struck in 1937, and a further 11 million struck in 1938 with the 1937 date. Which means that 1938 dated coins are fake/fantasy. One thing about the OP's coin: just to the left of the base of the fasces, is a harp-shared "stain". Is this just a stain or piece of foreign debris, or is there an actual corrosion pit there, like a piece of the plating has broken off? Don't say "infinitely" when you mean "very"; otherwise, you'll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite. - C. S. Lewis
|
|
Valued Member
United States
295 Posts |
Quote:
s this just a stain or piece of foreign debris It is just some sticky residue on the surface of the coin. The more I look at this, the more I'm leaning toward it being fake. I'll wait for the scale to arrive to confirm it and then request a refund through ebay. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
1985 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
1985 Posts |
And here's an extremely crude 1901 version which I found noodling some bulk world coin, again with hole in the same spot.   You can't mistake this one for the real thing because 1. This thing is in medal alignment when it should be in coin alignment 2. There is no A mint mark on the reverse 3. Says POIDS 2gr7 on the reverse when it should say POIDS 5gr4 4. It weighs 5.8 grams when it should weigh 5.4 grams 5. Diameter is 24.5 mm when it should be 26 mm |
|
Moderator
United States
34439 Posts |
Quote:
Is it possible for a silver-plated counterfeit to tone like this? I don't see why not—seems very possible to me. "If you climb a good tree, you get a push."
-----Ghanaian proverb
"The danger we all now face is distinguishing between what is authentic and what is performed."
-----King Adz
|
|
Valued Member
United States
295 Posts |
Quote:
Here's a thread about a 1920 version of this "medallion" with identical hole like yours.
That seems about right. It makes sense that this would be some kind of token that would be sold to tourists. The coin feels a little flimsy upon closer inspection; my guess is that it's plated. In any case, a weight test on my scale once it arrives should confirm this so I can request a refund on this. |
|
Valued Member
United States
295 Posts |
Update: I weighed the coin on my scale and it registered 4.26 grams, well below the specification of 5.4 grams. That proves what I had suspected, which is that it was a base metal counterfeit. I have gotten a refund from the seller.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
1333 Posts |
its fake toning, usually comes in a group of them in a pack.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1915 Posts |
I did notice the face on the recently posted coin.
It matches some fakes that I have.
My fakes were bought 17 years ago and my note taking method was not well organized.
I do recall that some coins were made without a mintmark and that had a separate KM number.
So mintmark or not may not be a diagnostic.
Each of mine have different wieghts and measures conpared to genuine coins.
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 16 / Views: 3,357 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 03/28/2022 11:31 pm
