Krugerrand Serrations and Alloy Errors and Misinformation

[LawrenceChard]

Krugerrands were first issued in 1967, as a South African coin containing One Troy Ounce of Gold.

Since then, much information has been published about them, most of it originally by Rand Refineries, or The South African Mint.

I first noticed some of the published specifications and information were wrong on 6th April 2010, originally as a result of a customer enquiry.

As a result, I / we published this page: https://taxfreegold.co.uk/krugerrandmisinformation.html, and in 2018, we ported part of that page to this page on our newer site: https://www.chards.co.uk/blog/krugerrand-misinformation-serrations/402

At the time, I omitted to take screenshots of the Krugerrand Specifications page on the Rand Refineries website, the Krugerrand page on Wikipedia, or any other sources. A few years ago, I started to try and find archived pages containing the serrations count errors. While searching, I became aware of more errors and misinformation on a large number, probably the majority, of websites which purported to give expert information about Krugers.

Today, I came across an archived Wikipedia page (4th November 2009), of which I show an extract:

The Specifications table clearly shows the number of edge serrations of all 4 sizes which existed at the time. This table was sourced from the Rand Refineries website. It might even have been me who copied it over from the RR site to Wikipedia.

To check the sedge serrations count, we take photos, including this one:

It clearly shows 160 serrations, as opposed to the 180 stated by Rand Refineries.

We then created the TaxFreeGold (TFG) page linked above, and e-mailed RR with our findings.

We received a particularly dumb e-mail reply from them, obviously from some disinterested receptionist or clerk, who had clearly not bothered to read our email, thanking us for our interest in Krugerrands, and informing us that the information we wanted could be found on their Krugerrand Specifications page, to which I had referred in my e-mail.

I wrote back, and politely pointed this out, and suggested they read my e-mail, and passed it on to a manager or superior. Eventually, we received an e-mail thanking us for pointing out their error.

Meanwhile, we photographed the other 3 sizes, and discovered that 3 of the 4 sizes had incorrect serration counts, and only 1 was correct. We shared this discovery with Rand Refineries, and also corrected the Wikipedia page.

Here is our table showing the correct number of serrations on each of the 4 sizes:

Size	Remedy (Grams)	Min Diameter (mm)	Max Diameter (mm)	Min Thick (mm)	Max Thick (mm)	Edge
1 oz	+ 0.07	32.61	32.77	2.74	2.84	160
1/2 oz	+ 0.035	26.93	27.07	2.115	2.215	185*
1/4 oz	+ 0.02	21.94	22.06	1.788	1.888	150
1/10 oz	+ 0.01	16.45	16.55	1.25	1.35	115

 

In my recent research, I have noticed that Rand Refineries, and many other sites mention that Krugerrands are made of "Crown Gold", which is 22cts (91.66% fine) gold. While this is correct, RR, and many of the others then go on to state that Crown Gold and / or Krugerrands are alloyed only with copper. None of them mention any silver content. This piece of misinformation is rife, being repeated ad nauseam, almost everywhere. Despite extensive searches, I can find no reliable historical source which states that crown gold is only alloyed with copper, without any silver content. I think this erroneous belief has come about by people making assumptions, and failing to check or refer to historical documents.

Early Krugerrands contain silver, but many recent years do not.

I recently created a "Crown Gold" TSF topic here: 

 

Other misinformation I have discovered include:

Production of Krugerrands started in 1970.

Until I corrected it sometime before November 2009, the Wikipedia Krugerrand page contained "information" about silver Krugerrands, which at the time did not exist, except on ebay!

I had noticed that after our 2010 discoveries, some websites had started copying our new, correct, serration counts, but recently I have been astounded at the number of websites which are still spewing out the incorrect counts, 12 years after we discovered and published the truth.

I have started to compile a list of websites with false Krugerrand information, but there are so many that it will take quite some time.

Watch this space!

😎

 

Edited March 25 by LawrenceChard
typos

[stefffana]

My 1/10 oz are so tiny and my eyes so old...

I have tried to count the serrations, but I have failed.

Because after counting six of them the results are between 112 and 117 (with an average of 113.83/coin), I have decided to stop and to trust you, @LawrenceChard.😊

I need bigger coins and bigger dioptres.

 

 

[LawrenceChard]

5 minutes ago, stefffana said:

My 1/10 oz are so tiny and my eyes so old...

I have tried to count the serrations, but I have failed.

Because after counting six of them the results are between 112 and 117 (with an average of 113.83/coin), I have decided to stop and to trust you, @LawrenceChard.😊

I need bigger coins and bigger dioptres.

 

Or a decent macro lens!

😎

[stefffana]

1 minute ago, LawrenceChard said:

Or a decent macro lens!

😎

A decent one will cost me few tiny Krugerrands. So, I will trust you.😊

[SilverStorm]

Thank you Lawrence for doing this.  Without accurate information, it is impossible to make informed decisions.   

[LawrenceChard]

10 hours ago, stefffana said:

A decent one will cost me few tiny Krugerrands. So, I will trust you.😊

 

9 hours ago, SilverStorm said:

Thank you Lawrence for doing this.  Without accurate information, it is impossible to make informed decisions.   

While counting the serrations on the edges of coins could be quite useful for insomniacs, I would not suggest it as the first line of defence in detecting and avoiding counterfeits.

Using one's eyes, and observing the general appearance of a coin, should be the first step. Comparison with known genuine examples is often useful, but is not always necessary. I tend to do this only when faced with a "borderline" case. Experience obviously helps, because the brain retains memories of what to look for, how a good coin should look, and alerts us when there are features present which also occur on fakes. 

Physical attributes such as weight, diameter, colour, magnetism, thickness, can also be useful to observe. Serration count is only a small part of this, but can provide extra evidence if any is required.

The original reason we checked edge serration count of Krugerrands was, as I mentioned, because we had been asked about it. Some might have parroted the "official" specifications, but this is being lazy. Once we discovered that the officially published information was wrong, we checked the other sizes, and compare them also. Good quality photos are, for us, a useful and convincing, piece of evidence.

While the main reason we take high quality photos is to showcase the coins we sell (and buy), other reasons being to help educate and inform collectors, stackers, investors, and even fellow dealers. If anybody wants to compare a coin in their hand with a genuine coin, but don't have access to one, then a good photo is a useful substitute. In fact, it has become preferred procedure for me now to get hi-res photos of suspect coins, then I can examine the photos and the actual coins at the same time. Photos are not perfect because they are only two dimensional, and much depends on the lighting and viewing angles, but one advantage they have is that they can be zoomed in, depending on the original resolution, enabling small details to be examined in high magnification on a large screen.

Our photos of edge serrations are not the most aesthetically pleasing because we are concentrating on being able to show the serrations clearly. They would never win a photographic competition, but their main purpose is to clearly show the required information.

A photographic record of previously seen fakes is also useful for reference, and education.

One other reason we choose to take high quality photos is because we can. If we are going to take, and publish, photos of coins, we might as well take a little more time and effort to create the best photos we can, within reason. When we bought our first DSLR camera and system, it felt like a substantial "spend". If we include the time invested in learning, this investment has been very substantial. As a major dealer, if we think we have invested heavily in photographic equipment, then this would be a proportionately bigger factor for most amateurs, including even those for whom photography is already an interest. A good camera is not the only expense, as a macro lens, lighting, tripod, and other things all add up.

 

[LawrenceChard]

On 03/04/2022 at 21:58, LawrenceChard said:

Krugerrands were first issued in 1967, as a South African coin containing One Troy Ounce of Gold.

I had noticed that after our 2010 discoveries, that some websites had started copying our new, correct, serration counts, but recently I have been astounded at the number of websites which are still spewing out the incorrect counts, 12 years after we discovered and published the truth.

I hav started to compile a list of websites with false Krugerrand information, but there are so many that it will take quite some time.

Watch this space!

😎

 

Here is an extract from a current web page by GoldCore of London and Dublin:

First, this is wrong because not all Krugerrands are a gold:copper alloy. Some recent years are, but most years also contain some silver, which is why they look yellow, rather than the recent red coloured ones.

Secondly, it is wrong because One Ounce Bullion Krugerrands have 160 serrations, not 180 as stated by GoldCore.

GoldCore has copied our high quality copyright photographs from our websites numerous times in the past, and settled our legal claim last year, but they seem not to have read the factual information published on our sites since 2010. Perhaps in another 12 years, they will catch up!

😎

[Britannia47]

Tried to count the serrations but gave up! 

So here is a photo on a slightly different issue, re the alloy used in a 22ct gold Krugerrand. L.C. alluded that earlier Krugs. were more yellow than the all copper alloy shown on the proof. The 1974 bullion coin certainly seems to have some silver in the mix judging by its colour. The proof is part of the 30th anniv. set and the certificate says 8.3% copper. The S.A.M seems to be the only Mint that actually states the alloy used. However, I get the impression there may be some nasty impurities embedded in the copper after L.C. did an initial test? I have included a pic of the first Silver Krugerrand that "never existed"! 

The 1997 set came from Bob Ilsley from Dolphin Coins, but that's another story......!

 

[stefffana]

3 minutes ago, Britannia47 said:

Tried to count the serrations but gave up! 

So here is a photo on a slightly different issue, re the alloy used in a 22ct gold Krugerrand. L.C. alluded that earlier Krugs. were more yellow than the all copper alloy shown on the proof. The 1974 bullion coin certainly seems to have some silver in the mix judging by its colour. The proof is part of the 30th anniv. set and the certificate says 8.3% copper. The S.A.M seems to be the only Mint that actually states the alloy used. However, I get the impression there may be some nasty impurities embedded in the copper after L.C. did an initial test? I have included a pic of the first Silver Krugerrand that "never existed"! 

The 1997 set came from Bob Ilsley from Dolphin Coins, but that's another story......!

 

Lovely coins!🤗

Can you please share your knowledge about " the first Silver Krugerrand that "never existed" "?

[Britannia47]

3 minutes ago, stefffana said:

Lovely coins!🤗

Can you please share your knowledge about " the first Silver Krugerrand that "never existed" "?

Just a little joke that L.C. would understand - nothing more than that!

[stefffana]

4 minutes ago, Britannia47 said:

Just a little joke that L.C. would understand - nothing more than that!

Thank you. 😊

I've been confused, because I've seen with my eyes the same coin.

 

[goldsilverdash]

If that article was written pre-2017, the informtion about the silver Krugerrand was correct at the time, no? The silver version did not exist until 2017, am I right?

 

[Britannia47]

7 minutes ago, goldsilverdash said:

If that article was written pre-2017, the informtion about the silver Krugerrand was correct at the time, no? The silver version did not exist until 2017, am I right?

 

Yes, you are correct. Up until 2017 Krugerrands were always gold, then 1 million Silver Krugerrands were minted for the 50th Anniversary in reverse proof like condition. Please forget my comment about  “never existed”🇺🇦

[Frenchie]

On 08/04/2022 at 12:51, Britannia47 said:

Yes, you are correct. Up until 2017 Krugerrands were always gold, then 1 million Silver Krugerrands were minted for the 50th Anniversary in reverse proof like condition. Please forget my comment about  “never existed”🇺🇦

Just to add that the mintage of these SP Krugerrand 2017 has been lowered from 1 million to 600000 

[Britannia47]

2 hours ago, Frenchie said:

Just to add that the mintage of these SP Krugerrand 2017 has been lowered from 1 million to 600000 

Of course - that was just the max number I read off the certificate. Perhaps mine is more valuable now! Thanks.☺️

[LawrenceChard]

On 16/04/2022 at 08:16, Frenchie said:

Just to add that the mintage of these SP Krugerrand 2017 has been lowered from 1 million to 600000 

 

On 16/04/2022 at 10:32, Britannia47 said:

Of course - that was just the max number I read off the certificate. Perhaps mine is more valuable now! Thanks.☺️

People quite often conflate "Issue Limit" or "Maximum Coin Mintage", with actual "Mintage" figures.

More information here: 

https://www.chards.co.uk/blog/mintage-figures-and-issue-limits-of-coins/634

🙂

[LawrenceChard]

CPM - Coin Portfolio Management Misinformation about Krugerrands

CPM makes the classic double error on its "Official Blog" page "9 things you need to know about the world’s most popular gold coin".

First it says that Krugerrands are an alloy of gold and copper, so it seems they are blissfully ignorant of the fact that for many years, since the first issue in 1967, until very recently, most Krugerrands included some silver content in their alloy. Most dealers or investors who have seen or handled any appreciable quantity will know that in most years, Krugerrands are quite yellow, but that in recent years, certainly since about 2017, they have usually contained no silver, and look a rather unpleasant coppery red colour. While this is hardly important as a coin conceived primarily for investment in gold bullion, it is rather worrying that a large company such as CPM, claiming to be "Consultants in Gold and Silver Coins", should get this wrong.

"3. Made up of eleven parts gold to one part copper, 22 carat gold was chosen over 24 carat because 24 carat gold can bend and scratch too easily".

 

Not only did they get "fact" #3 wrong, but also "fact" #8:

They incorrectly state:

"8. Bullion and Proof Krugerrands can be differentiated by the number of serrations on the edge of the coin, with the bullion version having 180 compared to the 220 on the proof".

While it is true that Rand Refineries did use to state that the original one ounce bullion Krugerrand had 180 edge serrations, way back in 2010, I checked, and discovered they were wrong. There are 160. As mentioned at the start of this topic, we informed Rand Refineries, who eventually edited their specifications page. We also corrected Wikipedia. I thought most professionals had now realised the truth, but it seems there are many who have not. While this is not really important, the fact that they are churning our such misinformation a dozen years later says much about their expertise and professionalism, none of it good.

The 288 Group which owns CPM used to copy some of our photos to use on their websites. They have now stopped. If they wanted accurate iformation about coins, they could still look at our websites, and learn.

 

CPM is a trading division of 288 Group Ltd. Registered in England No. 2000413. Registered Office: Russell House, Oxford Road, Bournemouth, BH8 8EX.

😎

 

Edited April 18, 2022 by LawrenceChard
typos

[ady]

18 hours ago, LawrenceChard said:

CPM

Glad you qualified, got me thinking of the wig wearing Jeff!

[LawrenceChard]

3 minutes ago, ady said:

Glad you qualified, got me thinking of the wig wearing Jeff!

Am I missing something?

😎

[ady]

3 minutes ago, LawrenceChard said:

Am I missing something

Oh sorry, was assuming you would have been familiar with Jeffery Christian & CPM Group - a total weasel in my view.

[LawrenceChard]

3 minutes ago, ady said:

Oh sorry, was assuming you would have been familiar with Jeffery Christian & CPM Group - a total weasel in my view.

No, I had never heard of him.

Is there more?

[ady]

1 minute ago, LawrenceChard said:

Is there more?

There is plenty if you search him out. I do not know who he is working for but seem like controlled opposition to me.

[LawrenceChard]

2 minutes ago, ady said:

There is plenty if you search him out. I do not know who he is working for but seem like controlled opposition to me.

I did a quick Google search, and found some stuff, including:

"Biography Jeffery | - CPM Group https://www.cpmgroup.com › biography-jmc
Mr. Christian is considered one of the most knowledgeable experts on precious metals markets, commodities in general, and financial engineering using options ...

But it looks like CPM Group have no connection with CPM of Coin Portfolio Management fame.

I also wondered if there was any connection with Cookson Precious Metals Limited, but apparently not.

I was underimpressed by CPM Group's "About Us" page. Rather waffly, and short of important key facts.

😎

[ady]

Maybe worthy of new thread, but are these the first silver coins without a denomination?

[ady]

1 minute ago, LawrenceChard said:

I was underimpressed by CPM Group's "About Us" page. Rather waffly, and short of important key facts.

Never seen CPM home page, but seen him speak on precious metals and just seems shady to me.