Comments on this Indian "proof" coin?

I don't know what to think about this...

The dealer listed it as a proof coin that was not listed (I assume in Krause).

He's been around awhile and has a full satisfaction refund policy, so I decided to take a chance.

Right now all I have are these two pics. What (if anything) should I look for to prove it's authenticity?

I considered sending it into PCGS or NGC right away, but Spock mentioned that neither are very good with Indian coins yet, and if it's not listed in Krause they won't grade it.

What do you guys think?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I would guess it's a new strike from fresh dies.

Coins like this really don't have a better chance of surviving than typical coins in modern times so its existence leads me to suspect it might have been intended as some sort of presentation piece. It looks like the planchet was polished but the strike is not up to proof standards so it was a single strike.

It's not out of the realm of possibility that it's quite common but I've never seen anything comparable in the entire series.

It's certainly a remarkable coin whatever the heck it is.

 

It has the appearance of a proof. Indian proofs are frequently not of high quality. Krause lists proofs starting in 1960, so it is possible that this coin was struck as a test piece the prior year. It is also possible that Krause is incorrect and proofs were minted for this year. Krause frequently omits dates/coins/denominations and occasionally entire countries.

 

That's why I'm both a little skeptical and a little optimistic. Experience with Krause, and Indian coins in general, doesn't rule out the possibility.

Does anyone think NGC would be able to authenticate it? I'd like to avoid PCGS if at all possible, now that I'm absolutely positive they'll slab anything for a buck. (See this thread http://www.cointalk.com/forum/t48918/ )

 

The mint mark, (.) under the year makes it a coin from Mumbai/Bombay mint. Now arent the proof coins from that mint supposed to have (B) as their marks?
Btw is this a brass or cu-nickel coin?
Nice pic and coin

 

I don't actually have the coin in hand yet, but when I do I'll take some bigger and better pics and weigh and measure the thing. Krause says it's supposed to be copper-nickel, but then Krause also says no proofs were made in 1959.

As for the mintmark it looks like a diamond to me but I won't know for sure until it arrives. Either way, I'm pretty sure we can safely say it was minted in Mumbai.

What concerns me the most is the fact that (to the best of my knowledge) the cameo proofs didn't start appearing until 72 or 73... so where the heck did this ultra-cameo coin come from?

(The first person who says China, gets a kick in the nads... )

 

Thats not a proof. Proof coins of the republic have been there since 1950. but the years known so far are 50,54,64,69( and then on regularly) i dont know what KM has written but the book is full of errors. It is quite possible that the coin has a prof like appearance and pcgs/ngc should be able to designate it as such. The coins are of the bombay mint and their proof coins had the B mintmark so my bet is that the dealer is out to make money and if its an indian dealer then their promises of money back are just that promises.

 

whats the diff between proof like and proof? anything in BUNC/UNC is proof-like? Btw do proofs come in some mint approved (sealed) pack similar to the PCGS/NGC packing?
Another q, from whatever lil i have seen in krause it says that bombay proof has a B mark, so anything w/o the B mark isint a proof coin from bombay? Also a proof from calcutta will have a C mark? The last question i asked cause i found a 25 p with a C mark dated 1985.
Thx

 

A PL looks to be a proof at a glance. They have some of the properties of true proofs but not all. There are several differences between proofs and uncs but PL's can share just about any mixture of them.

Most PL"s were struck from new dies and the dies were partially prepared as proof dies. This usually means that they were basined. This is a process that grinds the fields of the die flat or with a bulge (part of a sphere). Many PL's are struck on polished planchets.

Just having a good strike from new dies is rarely enough to make a coin look like a proof but it can be.

 

That's not completely true. AFAIK The Bombay Mint's B MM for proofs began from the year 1969. Before that it used either the standard 'Diamond' MM or 'Small Dot' MM.

The Calcutta Mint don't have any MM either for Proof sets or UNC sets or Biz strikes.

That's a foreign mint's MM. 'C' is the MM used by RCM(Ottawa).

 

Scott, the coin in question don't look like a proof coin to me but I can always be wrong.:goofer:
It might well be one of the many unlisted probe coins of India not found in Krause. Anyway I would say pass.:hatch:

 

Well it's in transit, but I can always return it.

Once I see it in hand I'm sure it'll be easier to make that call. I mean you can't even tell what the surfaces are like from those pics, just that it appears to be a deep-cameo.

What is a probe coin exactly?

 

Well you can call them pattern, experimental or test coins but they are not legal tenders.
Here are a few examples

 

Dang... now I want a couple of those too...

 

thx cladking for the explanation
Kidromeo appreciate your help too, btw u r right about the "C" for ottawa it came as a afterthought to me too... just that i dont see coins from calcutta in circulation as often as the ones from bbay that i get excited at the possibility of one.
btw that peacock 2 annas is amazing dude, thx for sharing

 

the peacock is real expensive the 2006 is not a pattern many of them were struck and they are slowly coming into the market

 

Bi-metal coinage always looks fantastic if done right.

Here in Canada our two dollar coin is bi-metallic and some of the commemortive designs outside of the standard polar bear design, are absolutely incredible. I don't normally collect modern Canadian coinage, but I made a point of picking up a few MS and proof copies of the 2 dollar coin's first year of issue.

 

I gonna take some of my words back....I did find that 1949 2 Annas probe listed in my Krause but the not the 10 Rupees probe. Another coin that I found a couple of months ago from circulation is still puzzling me. The 2009 Krause still showing the final year of mintage of 50 paisa coin with Parliament building at 2003 and guess what I found in my change

 

Heheh, you should send a copy of that pic into Krause...

 

Did just that :thumb:....hopefully we'll get more details in the next edition.