1918 Rouble (Armavir) Russia. Real Or Fake?

zypronix Hello and

I was able to find an example that is in slightly better shape than yours on the heritage web site. It sold for more than $900. This is a rather rare coin in higher grades and was a state issued piece that was struck on a thin copper planchet - the edge should be reeded.

http://coins.ha.com/itm/russia/worl...#17091709895

Heritage indicates in their description:




A close comparison of your coin with the Heritage pictures raise some slight concerns on my part. Your coin appears (based on my scaling of both sets of pictures) to have been struck on a slightly enlarged planchet about 2% oversized when compared to the die face by my measurements.

I also note that the collar die on your example is clearly chipped. I do not notice that same wear on the Heritage coin. The coin is so scarce that I would presume it was unlikely that the mint used two different die pairs mounted on different coining presses. If anyone has historical records of the Armavir issues please advise.

The circles or beads at the perimeter are slightly different shapes and are different distances from the raised rim. This area is often neglected by forgers and is one area I focus on.

The details of the dies are well done, however that may simply be an excellent transfer of design which can be done with newer plastic or computer assisted die making methods.

I would ask a couple questions:

1. Is the edge reeded and can you send photographs of the edge in the same clear focus that you sent for the faces?
2. Are the reeds applied by a collar die? Is there a seam or overlap in the reeded pattern? Take pictures of any damage or possible laps.
3. Are the reeds split top reeds?
4. Where did you "find" it - what were the circumstances? What if any coins came with it?

I am not certain it is either real or a forgery at this point but I feel there are causes for real concern.

The forgeries of this Russian coin have been around a long time - from the 60s at least. As noted in the files you listed the 1 Ruble is the most common forgery of the type.

You have the correct weight now given in the Sixbid auction - 5.56 grams. Any deviation of 1/10th gram would be a bad indication. Of course this coin may not have had a high level of accuracy because it is copper - but a tiny coin requires a rather precise thickness to get a full strike so I would not expect a large variation in thickness at all.

A split top and split tail reed is created when a forgery is pressed through a tapered ring die that cuts the reeds into the edge by gradually scraping off some of the edge and curling it up to form the reeds. If you have ever used a manual pipe threader the principle is the same. This process usually involves a stack of coins to keep the reeds perpendicular to the faces. The following is a sketch of the ring die.



The result of this process is a small closed seam along the top of each reed and a split at each end. The sketch below shows the results with the traces marked in red.



One of the ways to conceal the split ends is to grind one or both corners and the top of the reeds. Here is a sketch of what I mean by the clue left at the corner by grinding. It seems quite clear to me that is rounded corner is what your coin has. A collar struck coin in high grade usually does not have corners as rounded or irregular as what I see here.



As I noted above most forgers press a stack of coins at one time to keep the coins from turning in the die. Too small a stack of coins and they can tilt resulting in slanted reeds. The following is a picture of an 1878 Trade dollar forgery with tilted reeds. This tilt will ONLY OCCUR on a short segment of the circumference, but it can not be seen on a normal collar that rises vertically aligned by the die press itself.



On your coin if you look at the center of the bottom edge picture you will see reeds that are NOT perpendicular to the faces.

I would, based on the reeds, call this coin a numismatic forgery.

zypronix The fact that the design of your coin exactly matches a real coin does not mean it is genuine. Forgers can produce a die that is identical to any specific original coin including die cracks, chips irregularities and even flow erosion lines. Not all forgers do as well making dies but I know several capable of duplicating the details that you are illustrating.

This coin is worth enough to attract just such forgers who can complete such a project. However unless they also have a closed collared press - they may use other methods of making the reeds.

Regarding a reeded edge - I was under the impression that Russia used a closed collar press for coining after about 1903. Variable diameters can mean that different collars were used which can happen at any time a collar die breaks. Similar but not exactly identical collars can be employed.

Regarding the corner grinding I simple do not see evidence of any grinding on the two coins you used as examples. I also wonder how you can be positive the coins you used in that case are genuine?

Individually milling coins to apply reeds is not typically a process seen in mints because of the cost to do so relative to the value of the coin.

I see nothing at all that would cause my opinion to be changed.

In the middle 1970s I was training in Counterfeit Detection and authentication. I recall the "final exam" in that process included an exceptional counterfeit US dollar that was flawless. It could not be detected at that time - unless a pair were available to compare "post-strike" damage that had been copied into the forged dies.

The presumption that coins made in the 1970-80 period (or earlier) are not well enough made to fool a professional authenticator is absolutely incorrect. Many counterfeits that have been around for 50 years ate only being identified today after years of being reviewed. As a case in point - are the micro-O US Morgan dollars. The reason most of these really great forgeries are spotted is actually "matching damage" which is an impossibility.