1984 LMC I Cannot Explain

You obviously did not read my post.

Thanks John1,quite a reasonable explanation. I had suspicions in that direction as poorly described in my post.
My next question would be, do the abrasion devlope on their own during the run of these dies, or are they pulled and reworked at sometime during the life of the dies helping to contribute?
It is pretty bad and these dies should have been retired much sooner.
Good info and back it goes into the fray.

to the CCF!

with John1. LOTS of die polishing marks, possibly from removing a die clash. I think the odd color on the obverse is just showing an environmental stain that couldn't be removed with acetone. I think you're right about the abrasions. Both sides look like the mint tech attacked the surfaces with a file (or chainsaw) in order to remove the clash marks only to further damaged the fields.

Here's a link to a 1984-P Washington quarter that I have in my collection, that has a very similar look. It was struck with clashed dies, the reverse die was over polished and scratched like the cent above, and was then used to mint a broad strike error. http://goccf.com/t/358359 The reverse still shows the clash (a so-called Spitting Eagle) and some hideous abrasion marks around the eagle's head and neck.

It's interesting to me that both coins were struck in 1984 in Philadelphia. It seems as if they were trying to save money on dies by reworking damage and using them past their normal working life. That or the technician just didn't care about the job they were doing.