Early Date Facing Eagle 8 Reales Of Mexico

Hey swamperbob,

Is that 1827 8R Do one of those "debased originals" made with genuine mint dies? I ask because it looks just like the original. In fact if it wasnt for the "weird" color I wouldn't suspect nothing at all, what is the weight on that piece?

RealPeso The 1827 Do is not classified as a "Debased" issue by Riddell or anyone else I know of. If you notice the angle of the superior rays - they are more oblique than the originals. The dies are very well executed and the eagle can be readily confused with a version of the original. The differences are subtle so many collectors with high grade copies with INTACT plates can be fooled into thinking they have an original. It is a deceptive forgery.

Riddell lists two 1826 and by reference only an 1827 dated variety of this type (numbers 350 and 351) and I have discovered them to be fairly common as a general type. The 1827 coins are made from re-dated dies. However, there are numerous small die varieties. The number of actual dies is unclear. There appear to be mules and more than one die pair HOWEVER, the engraver was very good and it is my opinion that the dies were repaired/improved on more than one occasion making several very minor sub-varieties. Some of these alterations can NOT be seen on low grade examples. More study of this group of coins is needed to see if it was produced with only die pair.

Weights listed for the two examples in Riddell are 25.2 and 26.8 grams. I record a range of weights from 24.4 to 26.5 grams for my copies. Most copies are executed in a thin Sheffield plate that is the correct color on the surface. The cores were of different base metals. There are some that use a silver color core that can be difficult to distinguish. I posted one of the darker cores to make the forgery obvious.

So if you own an 1827 Durango with the obliques superior rays - I would suggest you do a Specific Gravity test to see if it contains the correct amount of silver. I do not know of an original that uses these dies.

You didn't ask but the edges are applied using a correct technique. You will find TWO overlaps on opposite sides but the edge designs are slightly irregular.

BE VERY CAUTIOUS WITH THIS DATE.

Macro122 When dealing with the Mexican 8R coins you will find many minor tweaks. Some were done when the dies were made but many others when the dies were REPAIRED. Mexican screw press operators seem to have clashed their dies more often than their US counterparts. As a result, there are more lapped 8R dies than Bust Halves. At times the lapping removed enough detail that a touch-up was done. I encountered this for the first time when I ran into an 1832 Go 8R with the final superscript s on the wrong side of the ray. I suspected a forgery BUT it turned out to be an original with a repunched superscript. Since that discovery I have located at least a dozen similar repairs that resulted in new die varieties.

There is a spectacular 1834 Go where the rays on the left side of the cap have an ANGLE point about 1/2 inch from the cap. That die may have been the result a weak original HUBBING. When the hubs were pressed into the steel die faces - weak impressions were common - usually a second or third pressing took care of the problem BUT if the die was removed from the press before the weakness was noted - how exactly would it be re-aligned? So I suspect that in some cases these weaknesses in low relief details were actually corrected by engraving the missing details.

The need to look at details closely is something not really done before. Counterfeits were not seen as a problem because the coins were of low value. But NOW it is getting costly to miss a fake.

I posted some of the really CRUDE fakes because I was trying to show a range. If I can dig out pictures of one of the debased 1830's Go coins I will post them. Durango did not lose dies - but did have an operator or two hung from switching planchets. The French dies were heavily forged in France and New England. The examples I posted are NOT mint dies. They are outside fakes nothing more.

By the way the French die copy 365 and 371 are by far the MOST COMMON Counterfeit in the Durangos series I am aware of.

To: swamperbob: I took a real quick look at my 1827 Durangos. I have (5) and happy to say none match the Cap die of the #350A you posted. What I call Ray 1 (the ray that extends from the lower left corner of the cap)points to various locations on the D, all significantly left of the location of Ray 1 on the #350A.

I have 22 Go mint Resplandores between 1826 and 1852. The neat one with sharply inverted N over N in MEXICANA turned out to be an 1849 GoPF. A neat coin where the N stands right out.

I have (2) 1832's. Both appear to be of the same die marriage at a quick glance. On the Cap die the 0 in 10 D and the subscript s in Gs are sharply recut. On the Eagle die LIBERTAD is sharply clashed above the cactus.

I do not have any 1834's.

I do have a 1827 Do in my collection but thanks to your help we successfully identified it as a original 8R in a thread I posted last year.

https://goccf.com/t/73544

But I must say that the 350A looks extremely similar and I was literally staring at my computer screen and pictures of my coin for a long time before I started noticing the very small differences. Whoever was behind that counterfeit did a splendid job.

Currently I am on the lookout for another 1827 8R Do but with the die style of 1827-1829 to complement the one I have that is why I pay special attention to any talk regarding the 1827 Durangos.

Thank You!

Macro122 I am back at home now so I can tackle your questions a bit better.

Like you I also collected Cape Bust Half Dollars for a period of time in between my periods of concentrating on forgeries. I never studied the dimes so I can not comment on clashing frequency. But the Mexican dies were VERY frequently clashed. Even the counterfeits often show clashes. (The ones made on screw presses that is.)

The Guanajuato 8Rs made with hubs do appear with various minor varieties. This is a result of several factors mostly involving the crude methods of die preparation. A weakly set hub design was often heavily recut to supply missing detail. The clashed dies were also repaired resulting in multiple related variations. You speak of a Go coin with a N over a reversed N - since 1849 was a date that used king punches and not full hubs it could be a real punching error. I would like to see it.

The forgeries of Go coins are second in number only to Zacatecas. These two mints were the most prolific so they were the targets of forgery most often. Mexico City is third and Durango 4th. The other branch mints all have period fakes but the numbers are far fewer.

You also ask if higher grade coins exist as forgeries. The answer is both yes and no. There are a few Riddell varieties that I have seen in XF, but many were intentionally made to look worn to VF or so. Most of what appears on ebay are the low end coins. The XF coins are often considered REAL when the top layer is intact so I suspect many reside in older collections undetected.

Specific Gravity is easily measured by weighing the coin in air and in water. The difference in the two weights in grams is the Volume of the coin in Cubic centimeters. SG is weight divided by volume. So technically you do not directly measure the displacement you measure the change in weight caused by immersion.

Here are pictures of three 1833 Go coins - a real one and then two counterfeits. Dies are once again VERY close.





This second coin is counterfeit - but in my opinion it is one of the coins made using the stolen Go hub reported in US mint records and alluded to by Riddell. Note the three missing elements of the hub are all ODD - the final digit of the date is tilted and the two assayer initials are crude and the wrong font. The edge is done using two mismated dies. Perhaps older salvaged edge dies.


This final forgery has a much better pair of assayer initials but note the very small 3 at the end of the date and of course the coin is plated base metal.

Nice counterfeit coins swamperbob they are practically a spittin image of the original, kind of scary.

What are the weights on the last two? (the two counterfeits)

Do they have the correct edge?

Speaking of counterfeit Go 8R's check this one out and how much it sold for: It's real just different die style.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...3D&viewitem=

Marcro: Most of the weights look legit, the only ones I would be a little wary of are the 1825 that weighs 25.37 (seems too low even for heavy wear) and the heavy ones 27.91 , 27.79 seems too heavy but then again the Durango mint did have some bad quality control in the early years and wasn't consistent.

as far as SG I believe this is the true and best way to determine if a coin is legit but I haven't mastered the process yet.

Thanks Real Peso and swamperbob:


I am suspicious of the 1825 that weighs in at 25.37 grams after a closer look at it. It only grades about VF. Additionally, a couple of others of the proper weight too. I have two 1825's that weigh 26.67 and 26.75 that look a bit questionable too.

I did not see any counterfeits listed in Riddell for Durango in 1825. So, Do you guys have pictures or descriptions of any 1825 DO bogo's?

Macro122 I have one counterfeit 1825 Do RL that weighs 26.2 grams but I do not have a photo of the coin only my computer record indicating that I bought it in 2007.

I also record that I have two originals that you might find interesting. They were created with the wrong number of rays. (The cap should have 32 rays). But in 1825 the number still varied - at least at Durango. One copy which I still keep in the suspect category has only 28 rays while the other has a far more believable 31. I originally bought both as counterfeits but after extensive testing the second one has proven to be real (beyond any doubt in my mind). The reservations I still have about the coin with 28 rays are very subjective in nature. The error just seems too significant to have never been noticed before. Neither is noted in Resplandores.

I will have to dig these out and take pictures.