| Author |
 Replies: 7 / Views: 474 |
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
55 Posts |
In keeping with the thread on the recent counterfeit toonies, I have these two older ones that I believe are counterfeit, and would like some opinions. The first is dated 2011. In many regards it seems genuine as it weighs 7.3g, and the edge serrations are good. Aside from the obvious rotated centre (not sure if this happens on genuine toonies?) it does not pass the drop test as it has absolutely no ping (even my kids and wife picked up on the dull thud). Furthermore the lettering on the reverse has a very weak strike. I found this 5 or 6 years ago. The second is a 2004 that I found today. It is not the recent 2020 version, but I wonder if it's the older Montreal version. This one is a little heavy at 7.5g, and has poor edge serrations that do not line up well. The rim on the obverse is very wide and the rim on the reverse is completely worn. The colour of the outer ring is slightly more white than the genuine version. It also does not pass the drop test. Any thoughts?    |
|
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
55 Posts |
Oops, forgot the 2011 obverse here it is  |
|
Valued Member
United States
180 Posts |
They certainly don't look right to me. The tolerances on the inner rings look shoddy, the wear on the letters is pretty severe for the time these could've been in circulation, and the rotated center seems totally unlikely.
I don't have much experience in spotting them but I call fakes
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
18108 Posts |
Looks like die struck fake to me.
Need more striking pressure to be more convincing.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
86 Posts |
The 2011 is ok. But the 3004 is a counterfeit coin for sure.
|
|
Moderator
Canada
9539 Posts |
The 2011 is legit, someone just messed with the core orientation...
"Discovery follows discovery, each both raising and answering questions, each ending a long search, and each providing the new instruments for a new search." -- J. Robert OppenheimerContent of this post is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses...0/deed.en_USMy eBay store
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
55 Posts |
Thanks for your responses everyone.
I was pretty sure the 2004 was counterfeit, and assume this is likely one the Montreal versions.
I wasn't sure about the 2011 as most aspects look normal (ignoring the rotated centre). What made me think it was fake is the weak strike on the CANADA 2 DOLLARS (which I suppose could be intentional wear, particulary considering the core was also tampered with) and the dull thud, which I suppose could be a result of the core coming disconnected?.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
460 Posts |
I think you are right. The core was tampered with- (they are struck with one strike, hitting both the outer ring and the inner circle at the same time). The damage could have been caused by securing the outer edge to change its orientation. Although, there appear to be raised bumps, especially on the right front leg, and along the body to over the other front leg. There is also missing detail in the islands to the upper right, and bumps on the ice under the head and neck. Some of the ice islands are not the right shape- the second from the bottom touching the left front leg is in 2 pieces. There is also a whole row of dots from just below the D of Canada into the centre ring- it just does not seem right. The queen's side shows differences in the way the date figures appear- the 2 shows a bulb end, where the regular one is straight, the drop stroke is thinner than the horizontal, (regular is the same thickness), the 1's appear to be too thin, the necklace is not well defined, and the inside of the ear, and the hair over the ear show differences. This could well be a counterfeit, unless the lighting is making me see things that are not really there.
Regarding the 2004-2005 Montreal issues, there were differences in the fields- colour, sheen,and extreme differences where the numbers/letters met the field. On the counterfeit it was a smooth curved transition from the writing to the field, where on the genuine coin it was sharply defined.
|
| |
Replies: 7 / Views: 474 |
|
Posted 01/19/2021 9:59 pm
