Thorn announce Nomad Mk 3

[mickeg]

But what surprises me the most is that it is not a Logo.  I like the way the Logo mounts the center of gravity of the load lower on the bike.

I've ridden a bike with a Vega then the same bike with a Logo with 25kg of panniers, the logo lowers the bags but also puts them further back often moving the centre of gravity behind the rear wheel and turning the bike into a wheelie machine up hills.

I can see how the Logo puts the center of gravity in the load back another 5 or 10 mm, the part of the pannier where your heels could hit is often on a slight angle so lowering the pannier about 55 mm could mean that you have to push the pannier back another 5 to 10 mm to avoid heel strike. 

But I can't see how that small of a change could have made such a big difference to turn into a wheelie machine.

First photo, my Nomad with an Ortlieb Back roller on it, you can't see the hub in the photo but I would guess that the hub is only about 3 inches (~~ 75 mm) forward from the pannier center of gravity.  The part of the rim that is horizontal in the photo would be directly above the hub axle so it is pretty easy to guess where the hub is.

Second photo with a Carradry pannier on the Logo.  Looks like center of gravity of the pannier is also only about 3 inches behind the hub.    I had to custom fabricate my own lower hook for the Carradry, the pannier hook did not play well with the Logo.  My do-it-yourself hook is a bent and drilled piece of Aluminum bar stock with a piece of inner tube rubber over it to reduce chaffing and silence any rattles.

[chillmoister]

Hi ....is the new MK3 Nomad disc only fork compatible with my MK2 Nomad frame? If so which offset should I choose?  Also, If I change my wheel size to 650b whats the max tyre clearance I will have on the rear end?

thanks Pete

[Danneaux]

Hi ....is the new MK3 Nomad disc only fork compatible with my MK2 Nomad frame? If so which offset should I choose?  Also, If I change my wheel size to 650b whats the max tyre clearance I will have on the rear end?

Welcome, Chill! I suggest giving SJS Cycles a call or email with your query so they will be sure to see it. Dave Whittle, Thorn's Workshop Supervisor has moved to a new career elsewhere, so it may take a little while before someone with his ready expertise is available here.

Best,

Dan.

[Danneaux]

Hi All!

For those without Instagram access, Thorn has posted more detailed photos and updated text on the new Nomad Mk3. As the photo indicates, RED is one of the new colors and the frame sports cable stops and guides for a front mech as well as a rear derailleur. In addition, these routing guides, the seat clamp and the eccentric BB shell are all stainless. This will eliminate the possibility fo rust on these parts and should virtually eliminate seizing of the eccentric insert within the shell (provided both are greased with an anti-seize for good measure). The keen-eyed among you will notice an additional change: The BB shell is split and uses two pinch-bolts to secure the eccentric. This will eliminate "dimple damage" to the eccentric and make adjustment easier while extending service life. The Nomad Mk3 eccentric is anodized black, not gold as used on the Mk2.

There are addition detail shots of the rear derailleur adapter and Rohloff blanking plate as well as the adjustable bolt-on v-brake bosses that will accommodate both 26in and 650b wheel sizes and frame split designed to accommodate belt drive.

[Credit for all photos and text, @ThornCycles Instagram account]

Best,

Dan.

[Danneaux]

...and...

[Danneaux]

...and the same Instagram post includes an updated photo of the Orbit XL2 headset.

Best,

Dan.

[Matt2matt2002]

Ah, yes. Pinch bolts on the BB. Is this an idea used by other manufacturers?
I have often thought that the piercing method currently used is a bit of a design weak link. Sure, it's been around for a while and rarely hear complaints but the method looks odd to me.
I wonder if the next generation of Ravens will have pinch bolts?

[mickeg]

Thanks for posting the additional detail.  I see a lot of changes that look interesting.  Clearly a lot of thought went into the re-design.

***

If I was considering buying one now, I would have to think hard about the merits of the newer design with some of the extras versus the older Mk II that can take a suspension fork.

When I initially built up my Nomad in 2013, I had no interest in buying a suspension fork. 

Less than a year after I built up my Nomad, a friend of mine started organizing a mountain bike trip.  Since I lacked a mountain bike I faced the dilemma of either renting a full suspension mountain bike for the trip, or buying a suspension fork (and a cheap telescoping suspension seatpost) and converting my Nomad into a hard tail mountain bike with drop bars.  I bought the suspension fork and was glad I did so, a year after first mountain bike trip, I went on another mountain bike trip with the Nomad with the suspension fork.  I liked having the Rohloff for mountain biking.

***

The removable canti brake posts, I have not seen others mount them that way.  You can flip the plate over to move the post up or down for the two wheel sizes, I think that makes this bike the only bike where rim brakes can be installed for two different wheel sizes.  That is a very elegant solution, someone was very creative.  My only concern would be that the force a V brake exerts on the posts can be considerable and I am not sure if the mounting bolts are up to the task, if I bought a Mk III I would consider using one of those brake booster plates that we used to see over a decade ago to reinforce the canti posts.

This is what I mean by the booster plates, I have not seen anyone use one of these for years.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/MTB-Bicycle-Bike-Alloy-Brake-Booster-Cantilever-V-Brake-Cycling-Accessory-Well/283492053413

***

No mention of S&S.  I wonder if it is not mentioned because there is no change, or if not mentioned because they are no longer an option?  I have no idea how many are sold with or without S&S, but I am glad I have S&S on mine. 

Generically I think USA airlines  with their high fees have been more hostile to bicycles than European airlines, but this is less of an issue now because recently both American and later Delta airlines announced that they were eliminating their oversize fees for bike boxes.  But still getting a bike to and from an airport is a lot easier in a smaller case.  I expect I will continue to use my S&S couplers when I fly with the bike.

***

The eccentric, I see merits to both designs.  The older design on the Mk II has the disadvantage of having to keep your adjustments to specific points you have used before to avoid turning a row of divots into a groove.  The newer design has the disadvantage of having to slightly flex a very stiff robust piece of steel to loosen or tighten.  The older design I suspect takes longer to adjust.  I follow the advice I got on this forum years ago which is to remove one of the bolts so that I can see the locations of pre-existing divots in the eccentric (past settings) when I make the chain adjustment.  Thus, the time it takes to completely remove and then replace one bolt likely takes longer to adjust.  And the new design has infinite adjustment which clearly is an advantage.

I am assuming that the new eccentric is the same size as the old one, thus big enough that you do not have to resort to half links in trying to adjust the chain.

***

Maybe it is my imagination, but I think the gray color was metallic paint and the red is not.  I liked the gray better.

***

I mentioned this before, I would have preferred the disc mount to be on the chainstay instead of seatstay.

***

With the new one being derailleur ready, I wonder if they are trying to pick up some of the shoppers that previously would have bought the Surly Troll.  I used to think that Surly copied a lot of Thorn concepts in building the Troll, but the Troll clearly was more flexible in taking either a IGH or derailleurs.  But I am not a fan of the Troll horizontal dropouts.

***

With some of the bike manufacturers pushing 650b so hard for mountain bikes, Thorn was smart to make the new Nomad capable of both wheel sizes.  It makes me wonder if the chainstays are longer for a bigger wheel diameter in the Mk III?

***

The closeup photo of the eccentric on the Mk III also showed chainstays that appear to be shaped for a wider tire than on my Mk II frame.

***

When the new brochure is complete, it will be interesting to compare all the changes.

*****

[John Saxby]

Pinch bolts on the BB. Is this an idea used by other manufacturers?

Matt, the Tout Terrain bikes have pinch bolts, so that the eccentric can be adjusted with a 5mm Allen key (sez the advert.) I seem to recall having seen a photo, but can't track it down.

 

[mickeg]

I am pretty much clueless on anything to do with belts, but one thing I have heard is that you have to have the belt tension spot on.  Since the new Mk III eccentric design allows infinite adjustment and the old method on the Mk II does not if the eccentric already has some divots pressed into it, maybe the old method was not good enough to be used with a belt?  If so, since they are making the new frame belt-ready, perhaps they had to make the switch to a method that can set the belt tension with more precision?

[mickeg]

If anyone owns a Mk II and if they might want to sell it some day, they should download the current PDF of the sales brochure for reference.  Once the stock of Mk II frames are gone, the Mk II brochure might be harder to find.  I saved a copy of the brochure today to my hard drive.

[PH]

I am pretty much clueless on anything to do with belts, but one thing I have heard is that you have to have the belt tension spot on.  Since the new Mk III eccentric design allows infinite adjustment and the old method on the Mk II does not if the eccentric already has some divots pressed into it, maybe the old method was not good enough to be used with a belt?  If so, since they are making the new frame belt-ready, perhaps they had to make the switch to a method that can set the belt tension with more precision?

I think you're right that a belt is fussier than a chain when it comes to tension, though by how much I wouldn't know.  I've found a chain isn't fussy at all, anywhere between straining the bearings to falling off seems to be fine.
The split bottom bracket design is also to be found on the Mercury of course, I first saw a Tout Terrain with this on Peter White's website, where he considered it the best method, I copied it on my custom frame (between the Raven and Mercury) Having used both I'm in agreement with Peter White, I think it is the better system.  The clamping is well within the tubing steel's elasticity, there is no strain.  I can't tell weather the Nomad has four bolts or two, the Mercury has four and although it does no harm I think it's possibly overkill, Thorn overestimated the torque required to hold it securely and revised the advise.  The indent type worked faultlessly for me as well, though it also needs some understanding, I've seen a BB shell distorted by some overenthusiastic tightening and there was no way it was going to be round again, if I ever buy another frame it will be well down the criteria. 

[mickeg]

...
The split bottom bracket design is also to be found on the Mercury of course, I first saw a Tout Terrain with this on Peter White's website, where he considered it the best method, I copied it on my custom frame (between the Raven and Mercury) Having used both I'm in agreement with Peter White, I think it is the better system.  The clamping is well within the tubing steel's elasticity, there is no strain.  I can't tell weather the Nomad has four bolts or two, the Mercury has four and although it does no harm I think it's possibly overkill, Thorn overestimated the torque required to hold it securely and revised the advise.  The indent type worked faultlessly for me as well, though it also needs some understanding, I've seen a BB shell distorted by some overenthusiastic tightening and there was no way it was going to be round again, if I ever buy another frame it will be well down the criteria.

My Nomad Mk II has two bolts.  The photo that Dan posted of the bottom bracket on the Mk III shell looks like it has two bolts too since you can only see one in the photo, if there were three or four you should see that in the photo but with two and if one was hidden under the tubes in the photo then you would have a photo just like was posted.

Some of the companies that have an internally expanding eccentric that grips the bottom bracket shell would say their system is best.  And I can see their point, but if an internally expanding one ever had some corrosion or some grit that got into the threads that prevented it from easily contracting, that could be a big problem to fix.  I have not seen the eccentric that Rodriguez uses (the Bushnell), but from what I have heard it is probably the best system but is also the most expensive.

But in the big picture, type of eccentric is pretty low on my list of criteria and I have no interest in trying to switch my Nomad Mk II to another type.

I am not sure when the Nomad Mk II first came out, but the oldest Mk II sales brochure I have on my hard drive is April 2010.  So, spring 2010 to summer or fall 2019 is over nine years, that is a long time for a single bicycle model to exist without modifications.

[Rockymountain]

Thanks for posting this......the Mk3 looks lovely - particularly the British Racing Green. I now know what my next bike will be - all I have to do is get permission.

[Danneaux]

Thorn's Instagram account today announced a new Step-Through version of the Nomad Mk3. As before, Credit for all photos and text, @ThornCycles Instagram account.

The attached photos show a gunmetal grey Imron finish, which really shows off the details nicely. It appears no features are lost in the Step-Through model, as it even includes bosses for 3 bidons.

Best,

Dan.