[1] Sigma Metalytics PMV PRO - Introduction & Review
Vložit
- čas přidán 6. 09. 2024
- We take a look at the new Precious Metal Verifier PRO from Sigma Metalytics, try it out on some real and counterfeit bullion items, and do some comparison testing with the original PMV.
**NOTE: the correct resistivity of gold is 2.2 x 10-8 Ω·m
The original PMV and the new PMV PRO are available at one of our sponsors, The Copper Cave: www.coppercave....
Instructional videos from Sigma Metalytics are available here: sigmametalytics...
Explore the Fake Bullion Database: www.fakebullio...
Keep Up with Counterfeits in the News: www.fakebullio...
Donate: www.fakebullio...
Even the weight can be counterfeited for example the metal can be hollowed out inside and another non Gold and non silver metal can be put inside, we need a thickness scanning device for this
this device measure the thickness too
is there a reason why a real silver eagle or the real silvertowne bar give resistance reading higher than the published 1.59e-8 ohm for silver? The PMV-pro was yielding reading of 1.73-1.76 for silver eagle and 1.64-1.75 for silvertowne bar. These resistance is closer to copper, 1.68e-8 ohm, than for silver.
Silver Eagles are only 3 nines silver (99.9) Small contamination in the 0.1% can increase resistivity. Are you using the right setting for 99.9 on the machine?
This deviation from pure silver get me worried about really good fakes, that nobody has seen before.
This is why I prefer Canadian maple leaf which is 4 nine silvers. (99.99%) Silver has the lowest resistivity of any known metal, so faking 4 nine silver is next to impossible.
have there been any known complaints about jmbullion or apmex selling fake coins
We have not heard of any complaints about major online dealers knowingly selling counterfeit coins or bullion.
They would be out of their minds to sell fakes. Their businesses would be wrecked.
You mention an XRF tester at the end but even that can't detect plated items, since it only tests the surface of the metal. The Sigma PMV is a fabulous tool.
I'm about ready to quite buying pm's. This is getting frustrating. I just spent 800 bucks on this damn pm verifier and now I learn it's not that great. And everyone always says to weigh it so I bought a scale and my silver eagles are never what they say they are supposed to weigh on Wikipedia. I have bought all my gold and silver from APMEX and local coin shops but my sigma will say the coins just barley qualify as real being almost outside the box and like I said my scale and also my caliper come up with different measurements and weights then what it's supposed to be.
There is usually some variation in the weight of mass manufactured precious metals, particularly silver. A troy ounce is 31.10 grams, but even genuine bars and rounds will often weigh a little more. This is due to manufacturing tolerances and because it is more cost effective for the manufacturers to give away a few cents worth of extra silver than it is to scrap the piece and start over. Measuring the weight and dimensions is really a way to check the density of the metal. Currently a fake can match the electrical properties of the real metal (as measured by the PMV), OR the density of the real metal (determined by checking the weight and dimensions), but not both. You can calculate the density even if the piece is slightly over the stated weight. Pure gold is 19.30 g/cm3. Pure silver is 10.49 g/cm3. Pure copper is 8.96 g/cm3. Brass, which is what most fakes are made from, is even less dense than pure copper. I just weighed a half a tube of 2012 silver eagles and they ranged from 31.15 to 31.36 grams, all genuine. Buying from a major online dealer minimizes the risk of receiving counterfeits. Most counterfeits are sold by individuals through Craiglist, eBay, selling apps, etc. They do sometimes show up in the secondary market at pawn shops or, on rare occasions, at coin dealers who are not familiar with the recent influx of fakes. Make sure your favorite local coin dealer knows about FakeBullion.com and keeps up with modern detection methods.
Other than the through resistivity of the Pro, the other features seem to be merely convenience and all things you can do with the original model yourself (dimensions with calipers, weight with scale). The Pro just seems to make it automated and quick, which is very valuable for a coin shop, but for an individual maybe not worth twice the price.
I've noticed that you have to read the manual carefully to be sure you're using the right wand/sensor and using the calibration disk if necessary.
I hear ya!
Some how this unit seems more complicated to use that the original Sigma Metalytics Precious Metal Verifier which produces fairly accurate results. Still expensive at $989 but less than half the cost of the PRO.
Hi there, will a Perth Mint 1kg bar fit under the large sensor? It appears it will, I just want to be sure before I buy - I need to ship the unit internationally so an error is not an option.
Can the unit verify a Roosevelt Dime, Jefferson War Nickel, Washington Quarter, Kennedy Franklin half, or Morgan Peace dollar? If the market someday crashes and silver and gold moves to its actual value possibly showing on the US Debt Clock these will be hot items of exchange for products or services. Everyone will want to own one, all business will use them? Please test if available on released SMPro. Thank you so much.
The PMV PRO can test 90% silver coins, however it is a little trickier than testing other standard alloys. US silver coinage is nominally 90% silver and 10% copper, however the alloy frequently contains trace amounts of other metals like tin and lead, which throw off the electrical properties. Generally the older the coin, the more impurities, so the PMV PRO has three date ranges for 90% coin silver: pre-1900, 1900-1945, and 1945+. The newer the coin, the more consistent the alloy, and the narrower the testing range.
Even with those varied ranges, we have found some genuine 90% coins that fall into the red zone. However, the counterfeit 90% coins we have tested have resulted in numerical values of 7 or greater, where the genuine 90% coins typically read 2.5 or less, even when they cross into the red zone. So the PMV PRO does provide useful information when testing 90% coins, and at least for now, there is a large enough difference between the genuine and counterfeit alloys to distinguish them numerically.
Neither the original PMV nor the PMV PRO can test war nickels.
Actually the original (and possibly Pro) should be able to test a war nickel using measurement mode. You just need someone with a genuine one to give you a range of readings it gives, so you know what is correct.
Owned two of them and both times need to be returned for service.
Excellent informative site visited by interested and experienced precious metals collectors. New sub here. Thank you.
Very very good video showing the difference in accuracy in testing PMs with these two devices. This one definitely seems much more accurate. Even still, to be 100% sure I would always recommend an xrf scan, especially with gold!
XRF scanners are useless for through-checks as the X-rays only hit the surface metal a few microns thick (not even milimetres thick). The scanners work on the basis of excitation (Fluorescence) when X-rays hit the surface metal. A tungsten filled bar or coin would easily fool an XRF device. Further I seriously doubt a coin dealer would allow you to use a Niton gun to blast some x-rays on his coins for checking. The most accurate method is by using ultrasound techniques (gauge or through reader - the same device use to detect thicknesses or flaws in metal) of which bullion banks use for gold bars. However this would be impractical to bring to a coin shop for testing coins during a purchase as no coin dealer would allow you to slap on couplant (gel) on their coins or bars. The SMPro is the most practical tool to use when purchasing coins and bars from a coin shop or bank. In addition to resistivity measurements to screen out tungsten, the Pro allows immediate density checks which should screen out any copper filled bars and coins. Check it out : czcams.com/video/89ATeNy3DIo/video.html . This one should scare you : note at 2:46, the XRF devise came back with pure gold for a fake tungsten coin coated with gold czcams.com/video/YR_1xaWBeZ4/video.html
XRF can be defeated if you are a bit generous with the gold plating. A layer 0.5mm thick or greater is sufficient to pass XRF detector.
@ptaeiy No. You have to input the metal type say 9999 gold. The resistivity measurement is through a coin and so it works out the thickness knows the density and then works out the diameter of the coin. Please go here www.sigmametalytics.com/pmv-videos-improved please note tungsten has a different resistivity value to gold.
@ptaeiy Hi there;
OK let density of gold = rho
r= radius
t = thickness of coin
Using a coin > volume = pi X r^2 X t
Density = weight/vol
In the SMPro you input ;
- weight say 1toz or in grams
- Metal type gold /silver/ so *in effect you input rho*
SMPro works out
- the thickness as the resistivity is a through measurement (up to specified thicknesses)
- and also the diameter (on screen for you to check)
rho = weight/ [pi X r^2 X t]
weight - is input
rho - is input
t- is worked out by SMPro
r or d is calculated and worked out by SMPro
Ditto for bars
I also have an ultrosonic gauge but this is more suited for thicker bars. If you want to use an ultrasonic gauge it is better to pay a little more for one which can measure the thickness to at least 3 decimal places.
@ptaeiy Hi There - it's up to you - I have the SMPro as do many coin dealers (you may verify this yourself) - it is just so easy to use especially at the point of purchase. I also have an ultrasonic gauge for bars (the one I have is cheaper than the price for the SMPro). But you have to remember most bullion dealers wont allow me to use my Ultrasonic gauge as I need to apply the couplant. It's unwieldly and impractical at the point of purchase. I need these pieces of equipment as I have a lot of bullion and buy on a monthly basis. Mainly gold. Any 1 oz mistake will cost me.
Thank you for sharing
Do you know why the 90% US silver coins are divided into three different groups by years (pre-1900, 1900-1945, and 1945-)?
I thought that all 90% US silver coins regardless of the year are the same alloy mixture (90%silver and 10% copper).
They are all nominally the same 90% silver, 10% copper alloy. However, older coins tend to have more contaminants in the non-silver 10% balance of the alloy. It only takes a trace amount of lead, tin, or a few parts per million of iron to affect the resistivity. Sigma Metalytics checked hundreds of coins to measure the average range of resistivity values and found it was best to make three groups. The older coins have a wider range of acceptable resistivity values. The newer coins tend to have fewer contaminants, so they have a more narrow range of acceptable resistivity values.
So my $575 tester is imperfect, just great. My confidence level testing is not good
No tester is perfect. Stick to items not in plastic packaging or really thick and the original PMV is entirely sufficient.
Appreciate the informative video. If I can't afford the pro version, do you think the original PMV in conjunction with the scale can replace the pro? In other words, are there known instances where something passes both the original PMV and the weight/scale test, but fail the PMV Pro?
Checking the weight and dimensions is really a way to check the density of the metal. Gold is very dense, and the only practical way to match the density of gold in a counterfeit is with tungsten. A gold plated tungsten fake could be the correct size and weight, but the PMV will show the much different electrical properties. A copper fake could pass the PMV test, but copper is much less dense than gold, so either the size or weight of the item will be wrong.
Whether you are using the original PMV or the PMV PRO, you still need to weigh the item on a scale to confirm the weight. With the PRO, you can check the dimensions directly on the device. With the original PMV, you'll need to use calipers to measure the dimensions, and you'll either need reference material to see if the dimensions are correct, or you can do a calculation to determine the density and see if it matches the expected value for gold (or silver).
The bottom line is this: check the weight, check the dimensions, and use a PMV. A counterfeit could pass any two of the three tests, but there is no known counterfeit at this time that can pass all three. The PRO makes it easier to check the dimensions so you don't need another tool and reference material (or math), and also gives you more feedback with the through measurement to help detect plating. But if you are buying mostly known items that you can find reference information for, and/or do your own density calculations, then using the original PMV along with a digital scale and calipers should keep you safe.
The resistivity of platinum is 1.06×10−7, an order of magnitude larger than the resistivity of gold. An alloy containing sufficient platinum to match the density of gold would read "right arrow" on the original PMV and far to the right in the red on the PMV PRO.
Uranium is obviously more expensive and more difficult to obtain than tungsten or platinum, and has a much higher resistivity. Uranium is not a realistic candidate for manufacturing counterfeit gold, and even if it were, it would not pass the PMV test.
@@FakeBullion
How about a clad coin. Iridium core (higher density than gold) copper jacket (lower resistivity than gold) and gold plating?
@@nickl5658 The resistivity of iridium is more than twice that of gold. The bridge sensor on the PMV PRO reads all the way through the thickness of the coin. So even if the copper jacket was alloyed to match the resistivity of gold and was thick enough to match the surface reading for gold, the through reading would still be far outside the expected range, way off to the right.
Even the "surface" reading on the PMV penetrates the metal deeper than an XRF, so it would be a challenge to achieve a sufficient copper alloy layer to fool the PMV surface reading while still getting the overall density of the coin correct. Plus given the complexity of this hypothetical coin and the cost of iridium, a counterfeit made this way would end up costing much more than an ounce of gold.
The PMV Pro has the refiner's wand which checks deeper than the bullion wand from the original PMV. Also the PMV Pro's through testing I assume is better than the oiriginal PMV can do. Really thick silver and gold bars (e,g, > 20 oz) are probably more risky with either.
ty
What is the physics behind it?
I suspect it is using ultrasonics.
It is Resistivity not ultrasounds. There is more explanation in Sigma website.
www.sigmametalytics.com/instructions/pmv-pro-
videos.html
The interesting feature of the latest model is the ability to measure the Resistivity through the the sample. As far as I was aware up to now only ultrasound could test through the sample. So this is a major improvement to the previous models.
I read it was electromagnetic and watched the inventor describe it czcams.com/video/v_6XbbuDc9U/video.html
Do the electromagnetic waves damage or affect the precious metals at all?
No, the PMV is completely non-destructive.
But at 8:14 if you would have used a bullion wand? Wouldn´t it had detected the fake one?
That bar is too small to use the Bullion Wand, and if the bar is made of a sufficient copper alloy, it can read as gold on any of the sensors. It is very important to always check the size and weight (density) of the item, even when it reads within the expected range on any PMV device. Generally a fake can match the PMV reading, or the density, but not both.
@@FakeBullion Thank you! And in general the bullion wand? Isn´t it much more reliable than any other sensors of the regular tester? I´ve ordered especially a bullion wand because it comes 2mm through the metal instead just 0,2mm ... actually it´s a good idea to always use the bullion wand right? What would be too small for it? Everything thinner than 2mm ?
@@ch.wey.4406 The Bullion Wand does penetrate into the metal deeper than the other Original PMV sensors. The piece you are testing must fully cover the face of the sensor/wand. So for the Bullion Wand, the item must be at least 24 mm in diameter/width. Additionally, to test samples with the Bullion Wand and without using the calibration disk, pure silver must be at least 4.0 mm thick, silver alloys and pure gold must be at least 4.5mm thick, and gold alloys, platinum, and palladium must be at least 7.0 mm thick. If the sample is thinner than that, you must place the sample on top of the calibration disk and then place the wand on top of the sample to get an accurate reading. But the sample must still be at least 24 mm in diameter / width.
At this link you can read the PMV Original User Guide, PMV Original Technical Guide, and PMV Original Sensor Selection Chart for more information on the Bullion Wand:
www.sigmametalytics.com/manuals
@@FakeBullion Great informations! Thank you!
And a last question. For me as a private user... does it make sense to have a pro version? I have a lot coins and bars and I´m buying a lot at official gold traders. But for what I´ve bought the regular tester was to buy on the private market. As you said acutally the regular tester should be okay if I double check the coin or bar regarding to it´s dimensions right? I mean there must be a good reason for the decision to buy the regular one or the pro version and I´m not sure about that. If the pro version is the "perfect device" actually nobody should buy the regular tester. I´m still a little bit confused :-) Sry for that
@@ch.wey.4406 The Original PMV is usually sufficient for collectors and private users. The PMV PRO measures dimensions for you, instead of manually using calipers. The PMV PRO can also measure the thickness of some items in assay cards and numismatic slabs without opening the packaging. But the PMV PRO is higher cost than the Original PMV. So the PMV PRO is good for coin dealers, pawn shops, and other high volume users who test many items. Sigma Metalytics recently announced a new model, the PMV PRO Mini. The Mini has many of the features of the PRO, but it uses Android or iOS device screen over wifi instead of having a built-in screen. The price of the PRO Mini is in between the price of the Original PMV and the PMV PRO. We will make a video on the new PMV PRO Mini soon.
Will the thicker high relief slabs fit in left sensor ?
I don't have any high relief slabs to check. The maximum thickness for the large bridge sensor is 13.5 mm. Hope that helps!
I have perth mint 10g and it didn't fit the smaller sensor with its cover on. Is it a red flag? Also when tested, it passed through resistivity test and the density test but not the surface test. The dealer told me it happens when I have the cover on, but it seems like your gold bullion passed those tests even with the cover. Can you please help? I only have so much time if I should return it
I can show you the picture of the testing. Please help
The assay cards on some of the small, genuine Perth and Pamp bars are too thick to fit under the Small Bridge Sensor, so that alone does not necessarily mean the bar is fake. Sigma Metalytics recently revised the Small Bridge sensor to be slightly taller to accommodate those assay cards, so they will fit on newer PMV PROs. On older PMV PROs, the most reliable way to test the 10g bar is to remove it from the packaging and use the Small Bridge Sensor, and check the weight and size.
@@FakeBullion thank you for replying. As I said, I have 10g gold bar from Perth mint. Your video told that the only small bars that won't fit is 20g one so it worried me so much. So... like I said, I had to test with the bigger lense, and it showed green on through test, yellow on surface, and green on size test. What is your confidence level in this testing on this? I can email you the pictues...
@@LOL-ho4rt The metal must cover the entire sensor for an accurate measurement. The 10g bar is too small to use the Large Bridge Sensor. The Large Bridge Sensor will not provide an accurate measurement. So I cannot judge anything from the information you provided. You would have to remove the 10g bar from the assay card and test using the Small Bridge Sensor for an accurate measurement.
The only information I can provide you is an example of a counterfeit 10 gram Perth Mint bar. I measured the counterfeit plastic assay card "bubble" that holds the bar to be 4.29mm thick and total weight in assay card 17.42g. Unfortunately, I do not have a genuine 10g bar here to compare.
@@FakeBullion thank you very much... always a big time fan of your video. And I had to re watch your video multiple times to tell if my collections are real. By any chance, do you have readings with bigger lense on your fake bar as well... I wanna know if the machine is giving you the not so accurate results.I really appreciate all the information in your video to educate small investors here. I always get my bars from a legitimate source but it was little different this time. Again, thank you very much !!! You are one of the few channels that is actually helpful and make the whole youtube platform great.
how does it work with poured bars?
The optional wands can be used to check larger bars. The Refiners Wand can read ~2.5mm into the bar (minimum 24mm diameter to cover the face of the sensor). The MicroWand only reads about 0.1mm into the bar but can be used on small items. Coupled with checking the size and weight, these can help detect plated bars. Poured bars tend to have more surface variations which can affect the readings, so it's best to test on the flattest area available, and to test multiple areas on the bar.
Sigma recently released a new accessory for the PMV PRO, a large External Bridge. This is a larger version of the bridge sensors on the main unit that plugs into the DB port on PMV PRO. This sensor is able to read all the way through large bars (roughly kilogram size up to 100 oz) as well as take a surface reading, so it's capable of identifying "drilled and filled" bars along with plated bars.
I would probably use the large wand and test the bar in a lot of different places and see if the readings very much. Just a thought.
@@FakeBullion how much is the larger external bridge?
good question
MSRP on the External Bridge is $485. Some retailers may offer it for less, especially if you are buying it as part of a package deal. You can add an External Bridge to an existing PMV Pro, but you do have to ship the PMV to Sigma to have the External Bridge matched and calibrated.
8:33 is why this is worth the money
Seems like the channel and the web site are dead; hopefully the youtuber is not. It was good idea but appears the owner wasn't able to stick with it. Too bad; it would have been a good channel and good site.
Dimensions don't lie
@@MPD90 it ain't passing the drop test
@@MPD90 most people get fooled but for the folks who know what they're looking for dimensions are a dead giveaway
@@09nedly09 Its kinda nuts how many different ways you can check a coin... by weight, dimensions, ultrasound, induction, xrf, chemical, Acoustic(drop or ping test) magnets.....
$10 to make in China ~
Who else here wants to torture counterfeiters? Waterboard em, Electric shock, bamboo slivers driven between their fingernails ......maybe submerged in ice water? Staked to ant colony?...anymore suggestions? Oh yeah my favorite....tied to a stake naked and allow anyone that got sold fake bullion to Stone them with said purchases .(I KNOW what I am aiming for!) ...although some of those large bars might be lethal I don't know....I don't want death on my conscience ...a lot of pain though? I think I can live with that
Yah, but you will never be able to locate these guys....