Home World & Ancient Coins Forum

1733 Mexico Klippe 8 Reales - tricky...

I passed on a raw eBay piece recently (not an example of this one) that you'd swear looked fine/honestly worn from the obverse/reverse pics (and certainly more legit surfaces than this)... but there are SO many good, older replicas and the style of manufacture makes them hard to judge. Didn't like what I saw of the edge so erred on the side of caution.

I DO think, even stand-alone, that this piece warrants doubt from a "pro" due to its surfaces:

This was in the Kyle Ponterio sale in 2020 where he called it contemporary... I'm fairly sure these are modern from the quality of some specimens PLUS the fact that are then some cruder examples out there, pointing to just doing a sloppier version of an existing numismatic fake:

Comments

  • pruebaspruebas Posts: 4,278 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The coin in the PCGS holder above looks suspect to me as well. Too crude to my eyes.

  • scubafuelscubafuel Posts: 1,716 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Rexford said:
    That is not genuine.

    That’s a definitive statement. What makes you certain? Is it just reiteration of the reasons stated in the OP or do you have additional observations that confirm it’s a fake?

    Thanks for the warning on this type guys.

  • Just to clarify, EVERY PIECE SHOWN is not genuine! They are all different specimens of the same fake. Compare them...

    The example that got into a holder just popped up on eBay, so figured I'd do a post.

    Aside from awareness of this particular fake, the further point is that there are A LOT of fairly deceptive, often decades-old fakes of klippe 8R floating about. Strong knowledge of what one is looking at is advised.

  • RexfordRexford Posts: 1,113 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 23, 2023 5:37PM

    @scubafuel said:

    @Rexford said:
    That is not genuine.

    That’s a definitive statement. What makes you certain? Is it just reiteration of the reasons stated in the OP or do you have additional observations that confirm it’s a fake?

    Thanks for the warning on this type guys.

    I’m certain because I’ve seen many genuine examples before. The stamp is fake and the host is fake; the style is crude and bulbous and the surfaces are grainy. The detail of the stamp is off and there’s essentially no flatness on the opposite side, which is a very bad sign. Looking at any genuine example should make the distinction clear.




    Vs

  • scubafuelscubafuel Posts: 1,716 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Thanks @Rexford !

  • jgennjgenn Posts: 734 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Be very cautious of the "Details" grade. TPG graders are pretty good at grading but not as good at authenticating. When a coin obviously falls into the "Details" category, I don't believe very much effort is made to authenticate it. After all, you can challenge it but the TPG gets to decide on the value of a "Details" coin so why bother.

  • realeswatcherrealeswatcher Posts: 338 ✭✭✭
    edited September 24, 2023 12:35AM

    When a coin obviously falls into the "Details" category, I don't believe very much effort is made to authenticate it.

    They do seem to scrutinize those coins less... have seen more fakes slip through as Details coins (and it was DEFINITELY the case back when NGC had separate "NCS" slabs).

    @scubafuel said:
    Thanks @Rexford !

    What @Rexford posted is absolutely THE best ground to stand on... really KNOWING what a genuine coin should present as.

    I do hope, however, you understand why the coin HAS to be a fake based on the pics shown...

    The "known fake"/"twin" method certainly is kind of "cheating" in terms of authentication... but life isn't perfectly pure and altruistic, now is it???

Sign In or Register to comment.