While there are some noteworthy differences in other denominations of 1988 and 1991, especially notable being 20 sucres, where newer drapery on the CoA is indeed performed different then the older one, this subnumber is not correctly assigned in my honest opinion. Writing this post since entries are separated still. The dies are clearly not the same, but… Below are rectangled CoAs of 1988 and 1991 - the older one indeed is smaller but to a what degree? Please consider the lighting as well (for the font of D on top for instance - it's the same) Much bigger difference is in 50S CoA between the years - documented here on numista, but still not separated of course for a good reason.
Sorry, but the coins have two separate KM#, so it's natural that Numista has decided to go for two separate pages. The problem is mainly numista didn't copy the SCWC data correctly:
The alloys are different!!!
From my collection I can add, that the thicknesses of the two coins are different: 92.1 2.16mm / 92.2 2.10mm
Sorry, but the coins have two separate KM#, so it's natural that Numista has decided to go for two separate pages.
First of all, they are only different subnumbers, that makes a big difference, since different subnummers are often not separated, not in Krause and not on Numista. So don't say it's “natural” Numista has decided to go for separate coin pages, Numista is not that consistent. Here's an example, Guatemala 10 centavos with 6 different subnumers on the same coin page:
From my collection I can add, that the thicknesses of the two coins are different: 92.1 2.16mm / 92.2 2.10mm
Sorry, but the alloys are not different, both nickel clad steel.
When you measure the thickness of a coin on several positions it always will be a little bit different. And then of course there's always some tolerance. So a difference of only 0.06 mm certainly isn't enough to assign a certain thickness to a certain subnumber.
And about the separating pages, I truly believe numista's universal goal is to deal with subtypes within single pages along with every variety. But a major design difference (or alloy difference) would make two pages. This is actually one of the rare, if not the only example that still exhibits two pages for two subtypes that…maybe are not even a subtype(my terminology - major variety) rather a minor variety.
P.S. Even a different main KM# should not necessarily mean different types. These occasions are rare though and arise from historical reasons, for instance data being copied from national catalogs where identical coins were minted during reign of two or more rulers (Germany, Italy, Denmark, India etc)
Normally I pass all my coins on the scale when entering them in my collection. I did not always have a scale, so the coins before my first scale (20 years ago) awaits to be weighed…..
So, @Jasanche , do you think these two can be merged like others from ‘88-’91?
It's not two different types. Of course unless it is a different alloy or something like that.
Good evening.
At first glance, I agree that these two can be merged into one page. Give me a day to look at the two entries a little bit closer before I request the merge…
I've been working on my two coin one 1988 and one 1991 for an hour trying to figure out what the difference is to have different KM numbers. After taking pictures and measuring the arms and letters like SCWC says I just couldn't see any difference and decided to ask on the forum. Just before doing so I noticed this post from the coin page. So, am I right that there is no difference?
Also the comment in SCWC about only 100,000 being released vs. the 1,000,000 mintage in Numista for the 1988, is that true? The values seem to be the same as the 1991 with 80 million released.
