Is The Jefferson Nickel Going To Be Discontinued Any Time Soon?

There's two separate conversations going on in this topic:
- The OP's question about whether or not the nickel should be redesigned;
- The discussion about whether the nickel itself should be discontinued or not.

They are related, in the sense that if the nickel is going to be discontinued completely within a few years, there's no point in spending time and money redesigning it.

Finally, in answer to the OP's direct question: the nickel design is not "90 years old", it has already been redesigned, back in 2006. You have the Type 1 Jefferson nickel (1938-2003), and the Type 2 Jefferson nickel (2006-present). That both types feature Jefferson, and both types feature the same reverse design, does muddy the issue somewhat, but they are clearly "different types".

Just go to 5 and 20 dollar bills.
Coins are virtually useless these days.

Thomas Jefferson was a vitally important figure in U.S. history. He authored one of the greatest treatises the world has seen and helped establish our country. He deserves pride of place on our coinage and bills. We can pick at nits until the cows come home and the facts won't change. I hope and believe that he'll be on the nickel until its days are over.

Edited for grammar.

Good info folks .....

I may not like it, but you may be right. I live under the assumption that nothing will change until coins become obsolete altogether.

Ideally they become NCLT/NIFC like the half dollar has been (with a few exception) since 2002. And if the cent is NIFC, no reason to mess with zinc! Make them bronze like they did for the NIFC cents in 2009.

The strike quality of modern US coins is dismal. Look at a 2021 Washington quarter obverse and compare it with what is supposedly the exact same design on a 1965-dated clad specimen. It's not the change from silver to the much tougher copper-nickel, because you can see the same loss of depth of strike on the Jefferson nickel up to the point of the design change. I infer, not only that striking pressures may be less than formerly, but also that the depth of relief of the dies has been lowered to allow for higher production rates.

If the new Jefferson portrait were struck with the same depth as a specimen from the early years of issue, or even as recently as 1980, it would look very attractive even after decades of circulation wear. In fact I half wonder if the reason behind all the variations (State quarters, et cetera) in the current coinage is to convince people to pick coins out before they get worn enough to show how bad they really look.

Now that I am looking carefully at modern coins, I have to agree about poor strike quality. Many State Quarters had severely deteriorated obverse dies, resulting in faded and shallow strikes. Compared to ordinary Washington quarter strikes, the State Quarters (and subsequent issues) have been lower quality. The newest quarter designs will not stand the test of time, as they have gone to pop culture graphics, incuse text, and really indistinct designs. Our classic coins will still be regarded as beautiful 200 years from now.

I thought the Louisiana Purchase nickels had beautiful reverse designs. The obverse is ugly. The new Jefferson obverse doesn't bother me so much. I do like seeing the super sharp strike quality on the reverse. So at least the mint got that right.