| Author |
 Replies: 16 / Views: 4,040 |
|
New Member
Israel
32 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
3772 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
270 Posts |
I agree it's most likely a fake
so sad that so many coins are being made in China
|
|
New Member
United States
27 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
347 Posts |
Authentic specimens weigh 40.2 grams so at only 37 grams the coin is definitely a fake.
Gary
|
|
New Member
Philippines
3 Posts |
hi there. I need a little help here. i have 1 coin here from china this was from my grand father. it's the year 21 1932 junk dollar. is this real or not?   |
|
New Member
 Israel
32 Posts |
According to CoinQuest:Updated by CoinQuest. Appraisal ok., Mon, 14-Jul-2014 20:38:09 GMT
Requester description: 1903 29th year of huang hsu. Hu Poo. The rest is in chinese but it is noted as a tael (in chinese). it weighs 37.3g and is between 43 and 44 mm in diameter. one tael. Also the marks seems to match
|
|
Moderator
 Australia
16845 Posts |
Unfortunately, both of the coins posted in this thread are not genuine. The first coin - the Year 29 tael posted by Beny87 - never officially existed. They were not issued for circulation, with only a few patterns made. This one, apparently circulated, is therefore dubious. The second coin, the Junk dollar, is a commonly encountered low-quality copy. The easiest-to-spot indicator is how the rays on either side of the sail don't line up like they're supposed to; I illustrate this here. Sorry guys, they're both fake. 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
|
|
New Member
Israel
32 Posts |
|
|
New Member
Israel
32 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
270 Posts |
Too bad its a fake. but there are so many out there.
a friend told me he picked an entire set of Morgans for $250 so I looked at them. what a waste of money.
|
|
New Member
Israel
32 Posts |
But how can you tell this one is fake?
|
|
Valued Member
United States
347 Posts |
Quote:
But how can you tell this one is fake?  If you compare the Chinese character ( bao 寶) with either of the authentic coins you link to in your posts, you will notice that there is an extra horizontal line (see arrow) on your coin. This additional line is a mistake. The character bao is never written this way and it is not written this way on either of the authentic coins. This is just one reason your coin cannot possibly be authentic. Gary |
|
New Member
Israel
32 Posts |
 this one of the original images of the coin and the number of lines is the same I printed the image and comperd it to coin I have. Ones again thanks for the help but I fill I need more information to idnfie it not genuine our not |
|
Valued Member
United States
347 Posts |
Quote:
...I fill I need more information to idnfie it not genuine our not Compare the distance between the tops of the Manchu script (the four "squiggly" characters at the very top of the coin) to the denticles (the little tooth-like elements next to the rim). On the authentic coin, the top of the Manchu script is very close to the denticles. On your coin, there is a greater distance between the Manchu script and the denticles. Also, if you look at the first two Manchu characters starting from the left, you will notice they the upper part of the characters (particularly the second character) are missing and were never struck on your coin. Please also notice the very fine lines of the Manchu script on the genuine coin. Compare the fine lines to the very broad and crude lines of the characters on your coin. Gary |
|
Pillar of the Community
3772 Posts |
With all due respect 'Beny87', while I do not have the expertise with this coin 'Sap' has and especially not the in depth experience with Chinese coins 'manymore' has, if you do not want to believe the judgement of the resident experts then send your coin in to a museum curator or auction house with expertise in those coins so that a judgement can be made with the coin in hand rather then from pictures.
|
| |
Replies: 16 / Views: 4,040 |
Posted 01/10/2015 8:06 pm
