Sorry to jump into this discussion late - but I have been very busy with three collections I have purchased recently.
In this particular case I will give odds against the coin being real. The dies are simply wrong. This coin is most likely a very recent strike in silver made with dies that were photo etched into steel plates. I would guess that the edge shows the wrong detail because it was most likely added AFTER the coin was made by a process not used on originals. Most copies I have examined in person (and the one I own) have a reeded edge applied with a ring die. If there are reeds look for split tops or incomplete reeds.
The way to tell a photo etched die is the texture of the surfaces produced by the recessed areas in the die. If the strike fully fills the die, the metal extrudes and copies the surfaces inside the letters cut into the die. When the deepest part of this protected surface shows - you not only have a mint state coin - you have a method you can use to determine if the die was engraved or punched. In either a punched die or an engraved die this surface is key. Original coins were made with letter punches which were driven into the steel die surface. The flat surface of these punches leave groves in that surface very similar to the rifling in the barrel of a gun. On a high grade coin you can identify the individual punch used to make the die by these "lines". When a die is made by electro-erosion or photo engraving - these minute lines are NOT copied. The whole coin would be covered with a similar texture except that the outer portions of the die can be smoothed. The forgers can and do lap (file) the die surfaces (which produces the fields of the coin) but the recessed portions of the die can NOT be polished. The resulting texture is "rough". Looks kind of like a spark erosion die but a tad cruder on the photo-engraved dies I have observed.
This photo-engraving technique is the technique used to create most of the 1882 Zs 8R forgeries. It is quick and produces a poor copy.
Regarding melting old Chinese silver for these coins - you don't need to melt a rare coin to get the material. You can melt a few Fat Man dollars or their restrikes and secure the same raw material the Communists used for the originals. Old junk Fat man dollars trade at bullion. But the general idea contained in the comment that "salvaged silver" defeats many of the more common tests like weight, ring and SG is right on.
Also, I believe I can see a marginal ring on a portion of the rim. This often is passed off as a collar seam but this one really looks suspect to me. Look specifically at the rim between the numbers 1 and 3 under the hammer and cycle. The "collar seam" line is NOT concentric. That undulation (if it is present on the coin) is 100% impossible on a real coin unless there are deep rim nicks but such a weaving or undulation is commonly seen on fakes.
I also agree with the comment that the Chinese characters look bogus. They are not sharp as if created by a character punch but seem to merge into one another. This is a poor rendition of the figures. Chinese characters (they are not letters) are compositions that contain individual strokes which have significance based on position, thickness and even direction. The characters here are quite frankly a meaningless hodge podge.
In my opinion, the cost of certification exceeds the value of this coin by a factor of 2 to 3. But to be certain be my guest.
Please let us know the outcome. I have been known to be wrong at times and I can only hope that is the case here because of the cost involved, but I really doubt it.
Posted 01/22/2007 10:05 pm
