Thoughts On This 1839 Go 8 Reales If CCF Or Genuine?

Maybe you can post some bigger photos? THese are a bit too tiny to say anything useful...

The coin in your pictures is an 1859, not an 1839
and I believe it is a forgery.

I agree the date can only be 1839 based on the die design used.

20021sc We still need sharper pictures. Without them I can not do a detailed comparison with the known Numismatic Forgery.

Is the edge done correctly? Two overlaps of exactly the same length exactly opposite one another.

Please read :
http://www.coinquest.com/cgi-bin/cq...ain_coin=533

Well, here are 3 more pics if it helps. My picture taking ability is limited to say the least. I was trying to get a clear picture of the date & what I was talking about, but it's just not possible w/ my camera & my skills it seems.
Yes, realeswatcher . I am just trying to authenticate it as genuine or not.
Again - no doubt on the cleaning, it's been cleaned for sure. It might just be a very worn die on the cap side, , maybe the pressure or way it was struck, I'm not sure. Maybe on the closest picture of the date I have, someone can see some of this.
As far as edge pics, no way can I get them in focus.

20021sc Thank you for trying with the pictures.

At least I got a different look at a key point.

That key point is the 9 in the date. If you compare the first photo of your next to last post - the 9 "appears" significantly different than the 9 in the first picture.



The Numismatic Forgery I was wondering about initially uses a clearly knobbed 9 while the genuine issue and some contemporary counterfeits use no knob. The coins I own including the PCGS reject are in my opinion modern Numismatic Forgeries. They are simply too well made to be contemporary and yet the dies used show excessive wear. The NF version is not worth much.

There are contemporary counterfeits as well - of which realeswatcher posted two interesting examples.

One of the contemporary counterfeit that I am looking hardest for is one that uses a punch the size of a 4 Reales punch for the 9. It is part of the family of related forgeries that includes the 1833 with the small rotated final 3, the 1834 with the small crude final 4, the 1835 with the incorrect font final 5, the 1836 is the Riddell 324 which uses a small high 6, the 1837 the Riddell 331 with the small low 7 using the wrong font, and the 1838 using a crude small 8. I suspect all of these coins use dies stolen from the mint and collectively they may be the reason there was a star added to some of the 1835 Cap dies. (This is a theory I have raised only on this forum and I am still seeking examples so that I can attempt an XRF match between the coins.) The theory is NOT ready for publication, however, so far, I have found nothing to disprove it.

This does not settle the question of whether the coin that began this thread is definitely genuine or not. That needs more verification.

I am now entertaining the possibility that your coin could possibly be the small 9 version I have been looking for to extend the set in the related family.

One last thing. If you look close at the last pic, the 3 and the 9 look like they have a "tooth" coming from the bottom tail of each of them out towards the top if that helps any in identifying the coin.