Question About A Peruvian 1933 Silver Crown (Un Sol)

The type of dealer selling these low-value coins is frankly probably not sophisticated enough to weed out such theorized high quality fakes... Higher-end dealers may be if they cared, but they don't at this price/interest level.

The person who would know best, who may take the time to study the coins and their history, is the devoted collector of the type who doesn't care that they're not worth anything... I'm sure there are some out there - in Peru, not on here. Does anyone putter around on MercadoLibre?

There were no 1933 here... So, if we're instead/also dealing with at least a couple surrounding common-date specimens that may at least partially overlap with what's going on with the 1933 coin that started this thread... might it be fair at this point move away from the idea that recent high-execution Chinese fakes are in the mix here?

Of course, the key finding I see is:

In general I agree with most of the comments made so far.

Based on my own tests, I believe that the well made struck counterfeit copies I have located (three total) can be most reliably detected by measuring the specific gravity of the coins. Tests with magnets seem unreliable because the magnetic levels vary widely.

The original coin I posted was not magnetic. The two I located at FUN are both magnetic but only one is strongly magnetic while the other I would say is weakly magnetic. The strongly magnetic coin can be raised from a flat surface with an 18mm x 5 mm circular ceramic magnet. The second coin is far less magnetic - the ceramic magnet will stick to the coin and support it's own weight, but it will not lift the coin off a flat surface.

The test I used in Florida was to place each coin on top of a ceramic refrigerator magnet and both lifted the magnet.

It actually takes one of the rare earth magnets to actually lift that coin off the surface entirely.

Today I purchased a series of magnets from an on-line source so that I could use a more or less standard size set of magnets of different compositions (circular about 20mm) with various lifting capacities based on thickness. I am not sure it will do any more than confirm that measuring magnetism is simply not as reliable a test as specific gravity for the detection of counterfeits.

Regarding the 1933 Sol that started this discussion, I am not sure we have made any great amount of progress on its origins. I would not rule out China yet. What we know is that in the 1930s it was possible to strike counterfeits that have passed along side genuine coins - UNRECOGNIZED - for over 80 years.

I suggest that the recently appearing magnetic 1933 Sol coins are numismatic forgeries made as well as the contemporary counterfeits were. They may be made in China or the US or Bulgaria - BUT wherever they are made these magnetic counterfeits are BOGUS. The fact that NGC has encapsulated these magnetic coins and that the magnetic effect can be demonstrated through the plastic container is proof enough for me. There is simply no scientifically verifiable reason to believe that there are now or were ever any genuine magnetic Sols made in the 1930s. The alloy as specified and made at Philadelphia and Lima is a NON-MAGNETIC metal.

I want to keep this topic current, so I will add a few facts. These are preliminary for now.

I now own examples of every date from 1924 to 1935 with multiple copies of most. I am including the US and Lima types as well as the overdates. I am hunting for a magnetic example of each date and type. So far I have only 4 magnetic examples. The level of magnetism fluctuates.

I also have finally located a 1933 that is a magnetic type.

The next step, after I get a few more examples. in particular of 1933 dates, will be to take them all to the lab and have XRF tests done.

I think that will finally achieve a definitive answer to the question of the composition of the alloy used in coins with magnetic properties.

I plan to publish results with weights, SG and alloy of each coin along with some form of quantitative measurement of magnetic properties.

Thank you for all the leg-work swamperbob! I'll be patiently awaiting the XRF results.

As an aside, would you expect different results from AAS as opposed to XRF? It seems XRF is the standard method mentioned for coin composition determination but I know there are other methods. Just curious.

Since I last wrote, I took all 29 examples of 50% silver Sols to the ANA show and discussed them with NGC,ANACS and ICG grading services.

PCGS never did have time to talk to me.

ICG was by far the most willing to discuss the coins at length and to discuss what they might be.

The sum of the results was that from 3 to 10 of the 29 coins were actually genuine. The others were either classified as counterfeit outright (from 12-18) or they were not able to make a decision (from 7-12). All of the magnetic coins were called counterfeit based on 2 or 3 different opinions. I did not tell the people at the grading companies my opinion of the coins beforehand or what the tests results were. I used new flips to house each coin when I showed them.

The 1933 magnetic coins were all classed as counterfeit as were the other magnetic examples. This was done based on surface characteristics. Most graders did not use microscopes. None checked the weight or magnetism. The non-magnetic example of the 1933 which was called a "no opinion" or genuine shares one die with the magnetic type which was condemned as a fake by all examiners. I also classify it as a forgery. In my opinion, the fact that there are several different dies used to make the 1933 coins tends to suggest that a large emission of fake 1933 sols is or was produced at some time.

Before going to the ANA show I did Specific Gravity tests of all the 29 coins using a 4 beam balance Ohaus-111g scale capable of accuracy 2 two significant figures. You really need to use an analytical balance to directly weight to 0.001 gram. In all but ONE case the result was 9.5 or 9.6. The results were very consistent in that respect but magnetism varied and was unrelated to Specific Gravity. The mathematical average before rounding was 9.53. One more scarce variety of 1/2 sol had a specific gravity of 9.4. That coin was a rather blatant counterfeit that the seller insisted had been in his possession since 1965.

The possibility that some of the counterfeits dates to 1965 is quite possible. At that time all of the 50% silver sols were very common and there were no collectors for the series. They were however being bought up in large numbers because they contained silver. This means that there was a profit to be made by creating a low or no silver coin to mix in with genuine silver bullion coins. No one would have paid attention.

The XRF tests produced rather odd results. Some of the coins produced silver readings of 50% while others were much higher. The highest surface silver content detected was over 90% in 6 of the 29 cases. I expect to determine that these are actually "clad" coins - perhaps similar to Sheffield plate. It is possible to bond a thin layer of silver alloy with copper to nearly pure nickel. This combination dates back to the 1840s and can only be detected by XRF by cutting into the core.

One of the ICG graders believes that it what I should do next to prove my case.

Once again, I asked every dealer who routinely handles world coins if they were aware of genuine magnetic sols from Peru. The results of that question were as before - NOT ONE DEALER was aware that there were any genuine magnetic 50% silver sols.

So unless or until some actual scientific or historic data becomes available to support the contention that an actual magnetic composition was used - I for one do not accept the stories as being valid. All magnetic coins can be explained much easier by presuming they are simple counterfeits. This is another example where applying ockham's razor would support accepting the simpler theory.

I have already spent several hundred dollars and well over 100 hours trying to track down data on this one issue and my considered opinion as of this date is that:

1). ALL MAGNETIC SOLS ARE COUNTERFEIT.
2). MANY NON-MAGNETIC COUNTERFEITS EXIST AS WELL.
3). SOME SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THESE "FAKES" DATE TO THE 1960s, OTHERS DATE TO THE 1930s (TRUE CONTEMPORARY CIRCULATING COUNTERFEITS) and SOME ARE RECENTLY MADE NUMISMATIC FORGERIES.
4). THERE IS NO CONCLUSIVE TEST TO DETERMINE THE CATEGORY OF FAKE IN ALL CASES.

Incredible work swamperbob! Your a valuable asset to this forum as well as the coin industry as a whole. Thanks!

Thanks swamperbob, I look forward to these new contributions.

I stopped caring about this as... well, how much can one care about 20th century Pery coinage... but happened to notice this:



cointalk.com/threads/authenticity-of-1930-peruvian-sol.301491/

The discussion is thus far useless... but good closeups of this 1930 specimen, anyway.