1778 & 1779 Mexico 8 Reales W/Edge Photos

Agree, these look as regular original issues.

The first coin is real - no problem there.

The second is with no doubt at all (my opinion) a counterfeit or a forgery. The edge pattern is NOT correct. Look at the shapes of the O's and then look at the spacings between the individual segments. They vary on this coin far too much to be genuine. Then look at the King's mouth - totally wrong - actually looks like a Class 3 based on the mouth. Finally the edges of the letters are ragged indicative of a transfer methodology (post 1830) not a punched die (pre 1830).

The question I have is the distinction in class. It could be a late Class 1 (post 1830) in which case the SG would have to be UNDER 10.1 to qualify as debased enough. A low SG could also mean a Class 3 forgery as well. An SG above 10.2 could place the coin in either Class 2 or Class 3. The visual clues at this point are NOT adequate to tell which category the coin is for sure but Class 3 is the strongest candidate. The only class ruled out to this point is early Class 1 (before 1830) and of course genuine.

I would run an SG test first because if it is UNDER 10.1 AND uses a late methodology odds are that it is a Numismatic forgery. Class 1 late is NOT entirely ruled out but fewer than 30 coins have been discovered so far so the Late Class 1 category is far less common.

The second test this coin needs is XRF or SEM testing. It is clean enough so that SEM could be used. XRF penetrates deeper and will go through thin films of "stuff".

The key will be the last 1% of trace contamination and what it consists of. Critical elements to test for are Au, Co, Pt, Cd, As, Sn, Yt, In, Ir, Mo, Ti and Tl.

Some of these traces should be present others only appear in very modern copies made post 1930 or post 1970.

Thanks for your comments. Here's a closeup of the face and you can see the poor quality of the lettering in DEI. Also the rim edge has been pretty well mashed as if the edge was applied after the surface impression.

Thank you swamperbob, you see what I missed. The mouth of the portrait in coin 2 is strange. Thank you also jgenn's great pictures posted. Henry

HMMM ... with that kind of weight its hard to imagine any type or form of a silver debasement so it appears as a probable Class 2. Of course XRF for silver content and gold signature >= 0.2% would help. Sometimes only XRF will assist to differentiate between Class 2 and Class 3.

BTW - a collector/researcher (Julia Purdy - World Counterfeits Yahoo Chat Room) found in a Daily Globe Newspaper of Washington D.C. dated October 2, 1854 an article which talks about that 1071
CC8R. Have you seen this newspaper? Talks about the typical low silver just below regal and the gold being 2/1000 = 0.002 = 0.2% and not proper. Again its 1854 and they sort of mimic our low end acceptable range. Nothing valid or of a concern today just FYI. They talk about Canton, etc ... probably the same information which appeared in other newspapers on Type 2 China Market pieces.

Also that Peso piece I showed you turned out to be regal and not a electrodeposition candidate. Still searching for a couple MS examples of this new type <BG>. Can I call them NEW? LOL.

JPL

Water under the bridge ... I had a dream recently in which it was fifty years into the future and all collectors at this time could now own hand held XRF analyzers at a cost of $49.99 and people were examining and confirming all these Type 2 85% Ag Bust 8Rs and demanding their money back from TPG's and foreign coin dealers ... it was a HORRIBLE dream ... I desperately wished to go back to the past and the present time and then I woke up with a migraine ...

LOL

JPL

Just saw a question that was directed at me - regarding whether or not a coin with as low a specific gravity as 10.0 could be genuine.




The SG associated with a 10.0 level translates to a silver purity of about 720 fine. Therefore it can not be "genuine".

The SG results can not classify the type of coin (1-4) it is other clues usually do that. The alloy at 720 would be high for Class 1 and low for Class 2. It is possible for Class 3 of course but unlikely. Most Class 3 coins are either about correct in silver content or near zero. There is little reason for 720 fine silver to be used in a numismatic forgery - because it is low enough to be picked up by basic SG tests (you don't need a laboratory scale) and at the same time it is too expensive a metal to be used in cheap knock offs.

I would conclude that the coin is most likely a VERY early Class 2 type (likely Chinese) made before 1835 when the level of debasing was low.

A second issue:




When handheld XRF becomes common - it will also become as easy to use and confirm as a digital scale. Remember that if handheld XRF drops to $49 - the lab versions will be cheaper and costs to confirm will fall as well.

Regarding whether or not there will be a rush to get refunds I am not so sure. The time needed to get XRF accepted as a method for confirmation will also make the realization there are two types of coins a long term project. The market prices will adjust and over the same interval the answer to relative rarity will be determined. I am not worried about the final effect on market value. Class 2 should hold their present value while genuine coins will slowly inflate in value.