Fake Royal Mint Refinery (RMR) Gold Bars

[LawrenceChard]

Here are photos of a fake RM gold bar we detected recently:

 

Comparison of genuine versus fake, both shot through plastic film:

... and...

Our Niton test report on the fake:

 

The weird results are not entirely surprising, given that we tested them through the plastic film. The important clue is "GPP" which I circled, indicating Gold Plating Probable.

I did not bother to repeat the tests, or photos, with the bar taken out of the certificate packaging, as I had already seen enough.

This is a Niton test result of a different RM 5 gram bar, which I was happy to conclude was genuine:

Note "GPND" = Gold Plating Not Detected.

Naturally, we did not just rely on this one single piece of evidence, but also a detailed visual inspection, and we have carried out a number of other tests on bars and coins through different types and brands or holders, thus building up a "library" of examples.

I uploaded the following photo of a genuine example in error, but have left it rather than delete it.

 

[CollectForFun]

Interesting. So, maybe it's just due to testing through the plastic film, but is it really acceptable if the test result says .973 Au +/- .005? That would seem quite far from .9999...

[sovereignsteve]

That's a lot of tin. Do you often see that with plated fakes or could it be due to the plastic, an artefact in some way?

@LawrenceChard

[SilverStorm]

Thanks for sharing & educating LawrenceChard.   So what I noticed with my untrained eye:

1) The back of fake packaging - the white border surrounding the gold bar is quite large, and takes up a larger amount of space in the packaging.  There's less green packaging.

2) the back of the original packaging - the white border surrounding the gold bar is very thin.  There's more green packaging.

 

[LawrenceChard]

21 hours ago, CollectForFun said:

Interesting. So, maybe it's just due to testing through the plastic film, but is it really acceptable if the test result says .973 Au +/- .005? That would seem quite far from .9999...

It would not normally be acceptable, but it is also worthwhile looking at both Niton results, for the front and back of each bar. One side of this shows 990 gold, which is not surprising because of the plastic. The wide variation between the two results is probably also due to the plastic. X-Ray diffraction machines can be calibrated in different ways. Ours is set up as a precious metals tester, so it does not "expect" to see plastic. We also carry out tests on slightly random things such as chocolate coins.

So, I am quite happy with the results. At some later stage, I may re-test the genuine bar after removing it from the plastic, and I confidently expect the result to show 999 gold.

12 hours ago, sovereignsteve said:

That's a lot of tin. Do you often see that with plated fakes or could it be due to the plastic, an artefact in some way?

@LawrenceChard

It is almost certainly due to the plastic. When I get round to re-testing them without the plastic, I will be able to compare the results. 

I suspect the the Niton is reading the surface plating, and giving an incorrect, high gold reading. I would expect the fake bar to be mainly copper.

[LawrenceChard]

1 hour ago, SilverStorm said:

Thanks for sharing & educating LawrenceChard.   So what I noticed with my untrained eye:

1) The back of fake packaging - the white border surrounding the gold bar is quite large, and takes up a larger amount of space in the packaging.  There's less green packaging.

2) the back of the original packaging - the white border surrounding the gold bar is very thin.  There's more green packaging.

 

You are probably right. There will be numerous small variations and difference, and it is good practice to look closely at the packaging and certificates in addition to the actual bars.