1966 South Africa Gold 2 Rand Coins - Genuine or Fake?

[LawrenceChard]

1966 South Africa Gold 2 Rand Coins - Genuine or Fake?

Yesterday I checked and (XRF) tested 2 x 1966 South Africe Gold 2 Rand Coins, with results that surprised me.

Do you fancy testing yourself by looking at these photos to see what you think?

You could look at the filenames, but that would be cheating!

Coin #1 Reverse

Coin #1 Obverse

Genuine or Fake?

Now try the second coin:

Coin #2 Reverse

Coin #2 Obverse

Are they both genuine, both fake, or is there one of each, and if so, which is which?

Answers invited on a postcard, or below.

No prizes, mainly for fun and educational purposes!

😎

Edited January 10, 2023 by LawrenceChard

[James32]

Both look dodgy but coin (1) specifically 😎 

Maybe in those days the springbok was naturally smooth though 🤔 

Bin them anyway to be safe 😆 

[Solachesis]

1 is real, 2 is not.

Or both are real, or both are fake, I don't know 😆

[Solachesis]

4 minutes ago, Solachesis said:

1 is real, 2 is not.

Or both are real, or both are fake, I don't know 😆

My logic: 1 looks like it has some copper toning by the letters, 2 is more consistent.

The face and chest are consistent in their wear. Whereas in 2, the face and chest have a lot of detail, but there's barely any detail on the hair.

I look forward to being completely wrong 😎 time to stop procrastinating 

[James32]

Come on @LawrenceChard 

We are the only three in the building, put us out of our misery!

[Roy]

1 hour ago, LawrenceChard said:

1966 South Africe Gold 2 Rand Coins - Genuine or Fake?

Edited January 10, 2023 by Roy

[James32]

Just now, Roy said:

1966 South Africe Gold 2 Rand Coins

Where the heck is South Africe?

 

Wow @LawrenceChard wow, you chastised me for missing an (R) in krugerrand..

@PaulKruger have you seen this? ⬆️ 

[Roy]

I think the typo is a clue?

🗝

[ShineyMagpie]

My guess (and it is just that) coin 1 is fake, coin 2 is real.

1) has clear definitions around edges of image but details lost especially in the face and the background behind the springbok 

2) looks to have coin ware as apposed to just pour definitions on the front foot of the springbok. And still more definitions and detail on the rest of the coin.

Happy to be wrong, all part of learning.

[James32]

7 minutes ago, ShineyMagpie said:

My guess (and it is just that) coin 1 is fake, coin 2 is real.

1) has clear definitions around edges of image but details lost especially in the face and the background behind the springbok 

2) looks to have coin ware as apposed to just pour definitions on the front foot of the springbok. And still more definitions and detail on the rest of the coin.

Happy to be wrong, all part of learning.

Agree,. If we are both wrong.. probably best we join another forum 😁

[MonkeysUncle]

My untrained eye thinks that coin 1 is iffy. The eyes on the obverse are, well, hideous.

Coin 2 looks like it could be the real deal.

But I wouldn't buy either unless a kosher bullion dealer were the vendor.

[LawrenceChard]

1 hour ago, James32 said:

Come on @LawrenceChard 

We are the only three in the building, put us out of our misery!

Dignitas?

😎

[MonkeysUncle]

Just now, LawrenceChard said:

Dignitas?

😎

I can do it cheaper and quicker. Free postage too. Pass the shooter!

[LawrenceChard]

1 hour ago, Roy said:

1966 South Africe Gold 2 Rand Coins - Genuine or Fake?

Thanks for spotting that!

😎

[Anteater]

(Comment deleted. Attempted joke didn't make sense.)

Edited January 10, 2023 by Anteater

[LawrenceChard]

1 hour ago, James32 said:

1966 South Africe Gold 2 Rand Coins

Where the heck is South Africe?

Wow @LawrenceChard wow, you chastised me for missing an (R) in krugerrand..

@PaulKruger have you seen this? ⬆️ 

Perhaps it is near a French speaking region.

Of course, and Krugerrand should have a capital K not lower case.

Mine was a typo (one of millions) , what was your excuse?

😎

1 hour ago, Roy said:

I think the typo is a clue?

🗝

No, clueless more like!

😎

[LawrenceChard]

1 hour ago, Solachesis said:

1 is real, 2 is not.

Or both are real, or both are fake, I don't know 😆

Come on they are both real...

... but that was not the question!

[Petra]

Coin one fake, lack of detail on both sides

coin two, possible fake as the collar appears to have a lack of detail on the left, however, this could be wear. Not a lot were minted, would it have enough circulation to wear it down?

 

🤔🤔

[ShineyMagpie]

12 minutes ago, James32 said:

If we are both wrong.. probably best we join another forum 😁

I will pre-emptively get my coat

[LawrenceChard]

12 minutes ago, MonkeysUncle said:

My untrained eye thinks that coin 1 is iffy. The eyes on the obverse are, well, hideous.

Coin 2 looks like it could be the real deal.

But I wouldn't buy either unless a kosher bullion dealer were the vendor.

Whose eyes?

Jan van Riebeeck's or the Springbok's?

😎

11 minutes ago, Anteater said:

(Comment deleted. Attempted joke didn't make sense.)

Most of mine don't, but it doesn't stop me!

😎

[LawrenceChard]

12 minutes ago, MonkeysUncle said:

I can do it cheaper and quicker. Free postage too. Pass the shooter!

Mother's Rest?

😎

[LawrenceChard]

3 minutes ago, ShineyMagpie said:

I will pre-emptively get my coat

Just for a second, I thought you said "goat"!

😎

[Roy]

I'll make one attempt, my eyes are weak these days...

Matt finish?

[CollectForFun]

I think they are both of the same - either both fake, or both genuine. I'm leaning towards fake. Both are covered by unusual small "craters" - could be bag marks, but I would expect standard bag marks look differently. Then there is that strange discoloration - not only "coppery spots" or patina that does not look quite right but also some greyish spots and especially whatever is going on with the eyebrow on #1?

The sharpness of the strike may also look wrong in some areas but because my 5 minutes of looking at these coins was about by 4 minutes 55 seconds longer than my time looking at any rand coin ever before, I will rather stop my dubious analysis now and wait for the official results!

[MonkeysUncle]

5 hours ago, LawrenceChard said:

Whose eyes?

Jan van Riebeeck's or the Springbok's?

😎

 

The chappie. The bok looked alreet to me.

The more I look at coin 2 the dodgier it looks. But at least in doesn't have Her Maj on it with unfortunate lumps bashed out of her heed, God rest her soul.