Indian Rupees Pre 1835 - 1939

Pre-1835 hammered rupees certainly don't have the same thickness as Company and British Imperial rupees. But all coins of the same type should have the same thickness and diameter.

I don't think I have the pieces anymore, but I remember having two early British rupees (I think East India Co. - either an 1840 and an 1835, or two different varieties of 1840)... Used to drive me nuts b/c one fit perfectly within a U.S. half dollar 2x2 cardboard flip window, but the other piece was slightly bigger and didn't fit - maybe 1 to 1.5mm wider diameter.

That's not at all unusual for an older series like this... With Spanish colonial portrait 8 Reales, a normal 1770's-80's Potosi planchet is usually a few mm wider than than a Mexico piece from the same time, yet they are same prescribed weight. You don't need to measure with a micrometer to tell that the Mexico pieces are thus ever so slightly thicker.

In the case of Indian rupee coins, there can be difference in thickness. Their weight remaining constant at 11.6gms, Calcutta coins have lesser diameter compared to Bombay and Madras coins. Then the thickness must change.For example, rupee coins of Calcutta mint have 30.5mm diameter and of Bombay have 30.8mm (KM#457.8,Y4.8 of Krause.)among the "Victoria Queen" rupees with divided legend. This happens in many more issues as well.

Indeed there are fakes but not in large numbers. Look at the side of the coin. You can identify most of the fake coins by the crude execution of edge.