1882 (Yr. 15) Japan Yen - Authentic?

Does this 1882 Japanese Yen silver coin look authentic to you? I'm trying to find sources to compare various die markers with, but mostly it's just been comparing images online to what I see on my coin. So, I'm hoping that someone more well-versed than I take a look at this Japanese silver coin for a verdict.

The edge reeding appears similar. There's full cartwheel luster on both sides. Details are strong on both sides and appears problem-free.

The coin weighs 26.83 grams, the orientation is up-down or coin alignment, it has an approximately 38mm diameter (fits in my 38mm Quadrum), and the coin is non-magnetic.

Thanks in advance!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

If you look at this type's image in Krause (Y #A25.2), the numerals 416 and 900 look more tall and spindly on your coin;
in addition, the "1" of 416 looks more like a capital I than a numeral with a slanting serif on the left side of the upright.

This is no proof of anything, it's just a casual observation.

 

If anything is of concern, it is the overall patina that I am genuinely worried. It looks strongly like the super counterfeits that have been released in the market in the past year or so. The color looks off as well compared to a genuine example - this looks milky white whereas a genuine example should look more silvery. At this point of time, I'm leaning towards a counterfeit.

Note that this is a semi key date and genuine coins in this condition are worth serious money.

If this comes from ebay, especially a seller that is low feedback (less than 100 ish) and sells all kinds of 'scarce' world coins - that should be an alarm. Send it back and make the seller pay for it.

 

Find a known genuine coin, and compare the "416" feature, particularly the "1" vs. "I" question.

 

Here are NGC's photos of the same type coin but what looks like a proof version, or an extremely well struck coin.

The 1 numeral looks like an "I". However, the "900" looks to have not enough spacing in between the numerals, and the devices look a little blobbed.

 

Good job! There was always the possibility that the I vs 1 was simply a die variety. I'm still concerned.

=====
OK, now I see something else, but it may prove to be an artifact of making the image. On the OP's coin, the circle of dots around the dragon, the dots seem to be touching, especially above the 4I6; on iPen's image, there appears to be spaces between them.

 

I had a closer look - I am certain this cannot be a genuine.

If this coin does have a cartwheel "unc" like feature, the details do not add up. For instance look at field between the character "dai" and 'dot 416'. The leaves on the reverse do not fare any better.

I also had a look on ebay and this came from a seller in China that sold all kinds of scarce world coins. This is also not a good sign.

 

I have a few of this type and, though I can't absolutely vouch for its authenticity, something about it doesn't look right to me. I would probably pass it up if I saw it for sale. Again, I'm not saying it's not genuine, it just makes me go "hmmmm..."

 

Unfortunately there are not a lot of English language resources for the finer details.

It could be the photos, but the surfaces look a bit off/grainy and the weight is a bit light. The weights and diameters are generally quite standard and it should be 38.6 mm and 26.96 grams. Many coins have variants, but the basic dimensions remain correct. This is the same mint that shows a distinction between that size and the previous 38.58 mm for the year 3 yen and the trade dollar.

The shape of the 1 in 416 does match the style used between years 11-19 (and part of year 8).

Agree the dots look mushy and not well defined, but mostly in the 'head on' view. They do look better defined on the angled shot.

Here is mine NGC AU-58:




Here is are a couple HA.com slabbed ones:

https://coins.ha.com/itm/japan/worl...049-33589.s?ic4=GalleryView-Thumbnail-071515#

https://coins.ha.com/itm/japan/worl...3043-29329.s?ic4=GalleryView-Thumbnail-071515

on the other hand, this (also Heritage) shows the dots more similar to the OP--BUT IT'S THE WRONG DATE COIN (even though the slab says it's 1882), which makes me wonder about that whole grading event--and may be fine in year 19 vs. year 15.

https://coins.ha.com/itm/japan/worl...020-27525.s?ic4=GalleryView-Thumbnail-071515#

Anyway, based on the photos I'd be a bit suspicious and I'd want very exact diameter/weight. I'd like to know if it's as grainy as it looks. And, the weird circular marks in the center of the reverse make me wonder about damage vs. a manufactured issue--is this a feature on known counterfeits or is it just a strange bit of damage?

It's not a key/semi-key so seems like a less likely one to get copied, but you never know.
--------
edited to add: the more I look at it, the more 'off' it looks--the surfaces look way too grainy.
----------
Also edited to change my picture out to the vertical view.

 

OP's coin is 100% counterfeit. Now, please forgive me for the way I will come across as we all started as uninformed collectors. This rant is directed to no one here.

I am just now editing my original post to remove several characteristics that ID this C/F die; however, I will confirm two major defects as they have already been pointed out. The reverse is terrible. There are lathe lines in the field and a very granular surface on the relief. IMO, since this piece is not made to/and will not fool any competent numismatist, removing those defects will not make this piece any more deceptive. One thing I learned about genuine coins is they are usually made to be a well-finished product. While every defect on a counterfeit will eventually be seen on a genuine coin such as in this case the lathe lines and granular relief, it is not common. Look at the "unfinished, rough appearance of the fake compared to the genuine images.

On a scale of 1-10 with 1 being a counterfeit that would not fool your blind grandmother and 10 being a fake that gets slabbed and passes detection for a year, this is in the 3-4 range.

Note to OP: Your first image is excellent. The sharp reverse image is also. The others are of no help. It is too bad everyone asking for opinions cannot provide sharp images such as yours that blow up larger. Unfortunately, in this day and age, I don't wish to point out any more faults on your piece.
However, you and others should be able to identify a lot of them.

 

I like the patina / toning on that one!

I wish there was a comprehensive die marker guide somewhere, like they have on US coins. For now though, it seems like the best way to distinguish authentic examples from counterfeits is to use known or graded examples, and ask this community for an analysis.

 

I need to clarify something. I learned this scale from an authenticator. He suggested that other TPG's where he worked try it out when discussing the quality of a counterfeit among themselves.
Originally the scale had three parts.

1. Experienced professional authenticator or experienced profession dealer specialist on the type.

2. Above average experienced numismatist/collector/dealer.

3. Everyone else.

If the coin were in hand, using the above scale on the OP's coin it would be a: 1/3-4/10 as it would not fool an authenticator yet it should fool most collectors. Coins like this wring a lot of money out of the unsuspecting. IMO, the OP received a lot of good info from the posters who had nothing except images to base their opinion on.

 

BTW, what does the 416 mean?

 

Means 0.416 fine, 416 parts silver per thousand,.

 

Nah, the 900 means 900 parts per thousand...try again, I looked it up (I think)

 

Yes, I agree, I was asleep. Sorry 'bout that.

 

My guess is that it is 416 grains in weight. A Trade Dollar is 420 grains

 

It's grains. The short lived Japan trade dollar spells it out (and has a touch more silver).

 

Hello and excuse me for springing in to the discussion! I have a similar coin (see photos). This coin was in my father's collection. I'd be happy to know what y'all think. If I were guessing I'd say it's been in his small collection for some time. There are other coins (not Japanese) dating to the 1800's so I'm guessing that he's picked it up along the way. We're in Australia so it possibly came back with on of our soldiers in WWII. Thank for your help. (I need all I can get!) debs : )

 

debshugg's 1894 1 yen coin looks genuine. Would be nice to know the weight of this coin.