1763 8R... Silver Content Guaranteed!!

A copper made out of copper doesn't make it a Penney

Is that what you mean ?

I never bought from him considering the " inherited COIN" red flag plus other wordings that don't feel safe.
His coins look great though on picture, on this one the only missing thing is a clear picture of the edge (not blurry as here)
The dentils near MM don't go to the edge though, but it could be a perspective effect.

Frankly, considering this has a great chance to be a fake ... it's really becoming harder to figure out what is not fake - considering all the pictures he provided.
Did anyone here bought that guy a coin ?

Bob, I work for a firm that imports merchandise from China. They have a handheld x-ray device that can shoot straight through an item and list up the elements it contains. Believe me, a test of the few outer microns is not enough to put at ease any concerns about environmental pollutants in the merchandise. I have tested this device on coins and it gives a result to the nearest decimal. I will hasten to add that it also proclaims uncertainty levels far greater than 0,1% so that in effect the decimal reading is irrelevant, but it is quite possible that the seller has got access to a machine such as this and achieved a 91,7% reading - and then disregarded the uncertainty.

And even if this coin along with its description is 100% fake (I do not defend this particular seller), another seller could conceivably use this technique - so it is something to consider in such cases.

If any coin collector should get the idea of acquiring such a device, I can inform you that it costs about $75 000. Or it did last year. I do not follow this market, the price could have dropped by now for all I know.

Litotes I have researched the hand held XRF testers (about 6 months ago) - they are most commonly used at Junk Yards to identify scrap metal or by EPA types looking for lead paint or heavy metal contamination in imported goods. The beam passes through non metallic elements well but I was led to believe that use on a coin would produce innacurate results. I was told that they test a limited range of metals but that the range can be expanded with add on features and that some add ons were not SIMPLE. The costs for what I needed ran near $100,000 at that time.

To get an "interior" examination of most thick metals metals a cross section is normally required. They can often use natural breaks or wear spots BUT the focal area (the area being tested varies from a few square centimeters to a few square mm at the smallest. The reading is averaged over the area of the test. They also said oxidation and surface contamination could destroy the accuracy. It did not sound to me like they were even interested in selling or renting one to me. The manufacturers I called claimed penetration depths of several mm BUT the accuracy rates were as bad as +/-3%. One even said it could be as high as 10% which is worse than SG at its worst.

Like all other XRF testers they rely on reflection of x Rays and the radiation (particulate) that results from the impact of the X Ray beam with the atoms of the metal. The readings result from this "reflection" and while the beam excites atoms deep inside only the atoms at or near the surface produce clear readings. As far as I know the test is only accurate for the surface 2 microns deep and accuracy decreases with depth and surface irregularity.

The Deeper testing apparatus is (last I knew) laboratory equipment that requires a perfectly level surface to perform deep testing because of the need to do precise angular deflection readings. Here they usually require specially ground FLAT surfaces.

I will check further, because XRF is a perfect tool for what I am doing with the age documentation of counterfeits. I theorize that the trace contaminants found in coins will not only be able to estimate date of refining of the silver for real coins but forgeries as well. In addition impurities may act like fingerprints to link forgeries together for dating and ID purposes.

As part of the process for writing our book on Portrait forgeries of 8Rs, my co-authors have been searching for XRF testing capability that can read both surface and subsurface metallic contents of coins inexpensively. One of the authors knows an expert in the field who says that for coins (irregular surfaces) there is nothing that satisfies the criteria we want except a Lab set up with a VERY large extremely costly apparatus. That Lab type set up runs a minimum of $30 per test but will read "surface" alloy at a precise spot to an accuracy of 100ppm. Sub surface composition would require a reading at a point where the core is exposed.

To do a coin that is plated (with a break in the plating) - a minimum of two tests would be required PER coin and $60 per coin for testing gets prohibitively expensive when there are potentially 3,000-4,000 coins involved. None of us has a quarter million dollars lying around for testing expense.

So if you have a phone number or website for an XRF apparatus that meets our criteria I for one would love to know about it. I think XRF is the future of authentication and detection.

Here are the minimal criteria as I see them.
1. Capable of identification of all metals used in forgery
2. Accuracy to 100ppm but 1000ppm (0.1%) might be OK
3. Capable of precise focus on an area under 1mm square.

Please let me know I am VERY SERIOUS about this.

Bob, I will ask the head of our firms laboratory for details. I suppose I could be all wrong about this. I am pretty sure about what I was told but I have no expertize on my own to attempt to verify the claim. The readings of my coins could have been from the outer two microns for all I know. It seems you know plenty about the subject already so I fear I might have nothing much to add. But I will get the details of our apparatus for you anyway, just in case.

What jumped out at me was also the shield. Some of the design elements, like the lion that Bob mentioned, and the castle to its right, are sitting on top of the outline. Plus the area at the bottom of the shield, where pomegranate is, seems to be crudely done. From what I understand (and Bob, correct me if I'm wrong on this) the shield (minus the fleur-de-lis, I would guess) was applied with a single punch. If this was the case, design element overlap such as seen here would not be possible.

"Hum, another seller is selling some nice pillars, not sure why but I don't like the look of his coins..."

I TRULY hope you're being sarcastic.

For the uninitiated/ever-hopeful, when you see 1770s-80s Charles III Santiago (Chile) mint 4R and 8R, unless you know exactly what you're doing, DO run the other way post-haste... He's got the usual allotment - pillars, some counterstamps, the requisite Santiago piece or two - and smartly salts his listings with a few low-ticket modern pieces. See, his stuff must be real, b/c the guys who sell fakes wouldn't have that little $5, %10 stuff... RIGHT?

See, the real dangerous pieces are ones like this:
http://cgi.ebay.com/2-REALES-1797-S...230645844232

This is a $200+ coin in today's market... IF legit, of course, which this isn't. It's of course guilty by association, plus the coin itself has some issues... However, it's certainly decent enough to sucker enough people in to the tune of the $78 it sold for.

Now it disappears into the coin collecting world at large, one day to be resold by swell guys who guarantee the silver content down to the millionth part.

As were were talking about santiago coins, here is a nice carolus IV 8 reales (face version, not shield) : http://cgi.ebay.com/1803-Chile-Char..._1893wt_1156

Booh, and here is another fake pillar from guatemala, :
http://cgi.ebay.com/SCARCE-8-REALES...t_500wt_1288
(seems that guy sells his copies very well, check out his past auctions)