Mercury forks

[strictnaturist]

Hi all
I feel I have come across some of this info before, but can't see it again.
Hopefully you can assist.
As a Sherpa owner for ten years, and just about to purchase my commuter/ tourer bike for the next decade - hopefully a Mercury. Can anyone recommend which forks I should go for? I don't want to lose any of the comfort that the Sherpa has. Will the Mercury disc forks , running on 2" 560B really be half as comfy as the V brake forks? I am hoping for another decade of touring so also looking at the Thorn rear, and possibly front racks getting swapped from the Sherpa.
Biker friends think I'm daft having disc at the back and V at the front, but if I manage to keep cycling for the next decade.It will be the comfort which keeps me on the bike.
Any Mercury thoughts out there or disc fork folk with tales of comfort very welcome.
All the best for the next year ( and decade too)
Eddie

[mickeg]

...
Biker friends think I'm daft having disc at the back and V at the front, but if ...

Two and a half years ago I bought a titanium touring frame.  Was not really looking for one at the time, but I had always wanted a titanium bike so when i saw the frame at a fantastic price, I went for it.  That frame takes disc only, not rim brakes.  If I bought the front fork that went with it, that would have cost another $325 USD.  But I had a rim brake fork in storage that had the right dimensions (fork rake and the crown race to axle length) to fit nearly perfectly, so decided to save the $325 and use the fork I already owned.  Plus, I did not need to spend the money on a new disc unit for the front, but already had the rim brakes I could use, that saved close to another $100 USD.  Thus, total savings was over $400 USD.

Almost nobody even notices that I have V brakes with a travel agent on the front and disc brake in the rear.  But I used the same rims on the front and rear, so the disc wheel has the machined rim brake surface so that might help hid the difference in brakes.

And if anyone notices and asks, I just tell them that I saved a lot of money by using a fork that I already had when I bought the frame.  And then I tell them that in my opinion, I would do it again as having a disc up front was not worth an extra $400 USD that it would have cost me.

When it is raining, the disc works much better than the rim brake, but when it is dry out the disc and rim brake are close to comparable.  It is a touring bike and I have used it with a load of camping gear in four panniers.  And touring bikes need good brakes.  I am using Koolstop Salmon pads on the front rim brake which provide very good grip.  Initially, the disc brake worked poorly compared to the rim brake, but I took the semi-metalic pads off the disc unit and put some cheap resin pads on, those resin pads might not last as long but they have much better grip.  I now have great braking both front and rear.

In my case, it is not a Rohloff bike, so mine uses conventional six bolt disc, etc.  In your case, putting the disc on the back means a disc brake unit, a Rohloff disc (is that four bolts?), and the Rohloff with the disc mount fitted to it, each of those things push the price up a bit higher.

In my case I am using drop bars with normal drop bar cable pull and I am using V brakes.  There is a gizmo called a Travel Agent that can convert the cable pull for mixing standard brake levers with V brakes.  I do not know if SJS uses them, but if you go with drop bars you should discuss the brake lever issues.  I think that Travel Agents are no longer produced, but copies of them are made in Asia.  But if you use upright bars with longer cable pull levers, then no problem.

[PH]

running on 2" 560B really be half as comfy as the V brake forks?

Is that a typo and you mean 650B? 
I have three bikes (Well four, but I won't include the folder)
Hewit tourer with canti brakes, 1" headset and Reynolds 531 forks
Thorn Mercury with disc rear and V front and the 853 fork
700c Sonder tourer, disc brakes with a straight blade cro-mo fork

With 28mm tyres the Hewit is good, the Thorn OK and the Sonder unbearable
With 32 mm there's little to tell between the Hewitt and the Thorn, the Sonder becomes just about OK
With 35mm there's nothing to tell between the Hewitt and Thorn and the Sonder if fine
With 38mm tyres there's nothing between any of them

I chose the 853 fork because I already had a good dynamo wheel and despite the forks price it was cheaper than also needing a new wheel.  I also like the clean look without fittings I didn't need.  it's a good fork, I have no complaints and feel is subjective but my experience is it doesn't warrant some of the claims made for it.  Every fork I've had with a 1" steerer has been more comfortable than those with a 1 1/8" including one from Thorn.  The Sonder was a later purchase and I've been so impressed with the hydraulic Deore disc brakes, if I was buying again I might chose them for the Mercury (I still might, a new fork won't break the bank)

As I said it's subjective and the only way to know for sure is to have a test ride.  But for myself if I was planning on using 2" tyres, I wouldn't be thinking too much about the fork flex and would buy on other criteria.

Also - though this wasn't your question at all - if your main interest is commuting and touring I'd also look at the new Nomad.

[Andre Jute]

I'm with PH. The wider your tyre, the more comfortable you will be, and the less other factors will matter. At 2in and over of tyre width, you can choose just about any competent fork and feel no difference. And if you go to low-pressure balloons, like the Big Apples, even an overly stiff fork could become bearable.

Where I part from PH is in his apparent assumption that any tyre at 37/38mm will be bearable. I think that, once you have some minimum comfortable width, then other factors enter into the result nearly as much as additional width, the two most important after width being that low inflation is a comfort-breeder, and so are flexible sidewalls. Leaving aside incompetent tyres that flatted all the time and wore out with expensive regularity before I learned the hard way not to trust my LBS but to do my own research, of the competent tyres I've had at 37/38mm, I cannot tell you how much I hated the admirably thorn-proof and long-lived Schwalbe Marathon Plus, and the workalike Bontrager Hardcase Elite too, for their unrelieved harshness which put the price of a nice BMW in my physio's pocket -- and that's from a fellow who generally admires Schwalbe and Bontrager, and who in probably fifteen years or more hasn't bought any tyres that weren't made by Schwalbe.

BTW, my bike's entire suspension is in the Big Apple tyres and the Brooks saddle, and I feel no pain in either the small of my back or in my wrists, and haven't since I switched to balloons.

One more thing. One often hears that fat tyres and especially low-inflation balloons must necessarily be slow. That's exactly the opposite of the truth. http://thorncyclesforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=3798.msg16360#msg16360

I'm very happy to meet another cyclist who puts comfort first!

[PH]

Where I part from PH is in his apparent assumption that any tyre at 37/38mm will be bearable.

We only differ in clarity, my assumption being that anyone reading would be using good tyres.  For the record the experience listed above is with Conti GP4S in 28 & 32, Marathon Supremes in 32,35,38 and Marathon Racer in 35.  On the rear I'm a little less fussy, the Sonder is a work bike with an Alfine hub, it has a Marathon Plus for the puncture protection, and the other bikes will from time to time have something else I've experimented with, maybe something I've tried on the front and rejected.

[strictnaturist]

Thanks everyone, for what we expect from this excellent forum. Great advise from real life experiences.
Sorry, it was a typo PH , and great to hear that ( good quality) 50mm tyres will compensate for the introduction of disks .
I had briefly looked at the Nomad, but according to the Thorn matrix. The Nomad features quite poorly for general riding and weekend runs unloaded?
I shall definitely give it another good look over though, as the Sherpahas been amazing!
This new bike will be my only bike. Weekend runs ( 30%), commuting ( 40%) and available for Land Rover track touring to bothies and beyond ( 30%). Maybe the Nomad is more suitable?
Happy to take your invaluable advise before I commit
all the best
Eddie

[PH]

Happy to take your invaluable advise before I commit

Happy to share my experience, but if I were to offer any advice it would be to take the time for a test ride to make your own mind up. 
There's too many variables, between bikes, riders and components, that my experience and yours might differ. Mine is a 700c Mercury which may not be applicable to one on 650b wheels.  Plus although I've seen the new Nomad I haven't ridden one...
I find the Mercury well described as a sports tourer, it's rewarding when you give it some effort, and handles like a steady road bike more than a tourer.  I'm not sure it's the bike I'd chose for the Land Rover tracks. I do tour on it, but even with 12kg in two panniers and a bar bag, it sometimes feels like the tail is wagging the dog, if touring was it's main purpose it'd be the wrong bike.  I'm 6'3" 100kg and ride the 610 which is the largest size. 

Off topic - If you fancy a short holiday to include a day at SJS, I just stayed in Weston Super Mare for four nights on a coach trip for the bargain price of £129, only available in the winter obviously, the same holiday in the summer would be £350

[mickeg]

...
I had briefly looked at the Nomad, but according to the Thorn matrix. The Nomad features quite poorly for general riding and weekend runs unloaded?
I shall definitely give it another good look over though, as the Sherpahas been amazing!...

I have a Sherpa, bought the frame and fork used from someone in Canada that loved it but it was not the right size for him so he sold it to me.  I bought it in 2010, thus I am not sure which "Mk" version Sherpa it was.  I have done some one and two week long tours with it, plus some general riding.

Also have a Nomad Mk II.  The new Mk III version is quite different from the Mk II, I have no idea if it is as heavy a frame as the predecessor.  But the Mk II Nomad had  a weight rating for capacity (not counting the weight of the rider) that was about double that of the Sherpa.  Thus, the frame is heavy and stiff.  If the Mk III is as robust a bike frame as the Mk II, it would be great for carrying a load, but if you would mostly be riding unladen, this bike might not be the right one for you.

I started a thread a few years ago about a trip I had my Nomad on, if you want to read a short trip log for the type of trip that the Nomad was perfect for, check it out at:
http://thorncyclesforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=11917.0

If you look at that thread, I suspect you will conclude that the Nomad is much more weight capacity than you are looking for.  My Nomad is somewhere near 20 kg unladen which is a much heavier bike than most would want for light weight riding.  I am sure that you could build up a Nomad with lighter weight components to reduce the total bike weight, but it still would be a heavy bike.

I do not know much about the Raven, but it sounds to me like that might be a better bike for you than the Nomad if you choose to stick with 26 inch.

I consider my Nomad my heavy duty expedition bike.  My Sherpa is my medium duty touring bike.  And my titanium bike (non-Thorn) is for lighter weight touring.  The Nomad is the only Rohloff bike of the fleet.  I also have some other bikes that are not stiff enough for loaded touring.

[strictnaturist]

Thank you all for the advise.
Its true, I should ride one ( or two) before deciding. Unfortunately , I live the other side of the country from the Thorn HQ. Angus in Scotland.
Possibly that one bike - commuting/ weekend runs / that big trip etc is actually two bikes :-)
The Club Tour 650B is looking more like that bike than the Mercury just now, although the opportunity of the R hub is a financial  option just now with the CTW scheme, which might be removed without much notice.
Its interesting to see in the new 2020 Thorn brochure that non of the bikes have the comfort bars, or the Thorn racks or low loaders? Even the Nomad has the lighter rack.
with best wishes
Eddie

[PH]

The Club Tour 650B is looking more like that bike than the Mercury just now, although the opportunity of the R hub is a financial  option just now with the CTW scheme, which might be removed without much notice.

Have you spoken to any of the folks at Thorn yet?  One of my questions would be how different the Mercury/Nomad/Club Tour would be with the same build and wheel size.
I note in the 700c Nomad pamphlet that with the 853 V brake fork it would be lighter than a Mercury set up to carry the same weight! 
Despite the simplicity of a single bike, it does involve compromises, is there a reason this is to replace the Sherpa rather than compliment it? 

[strictnaturist]

Thanks for your help. I'm getting there!
I will contact Thorn soon to discuss the best option

[Mike Ayling]

Hi all

Biker friends think I'm daft having disc at the back and V at the front,

Whatever were Thorn thinking when they came up with that idea!

I optioned the Thorn fork with the braze ons for a front rack and XT V brake for my Mercury.
This brake is more than adequate and I have always done most of my braking front only, only using the rear for emergency stops.
I run Schwalbe Marathon Supremes 36 X 622 at about 65psi which gives quite a comfortable ride.
I love the Rohloff (we started with one on our Thorn tandem) and as others have said you can hurry the Merc along if you want to.

FWIW

Mike

[leftpoole]

The Thorn designer has an aversion to front discs. He seems to think the forks will break with continued use!
Johnh

[PH]

The Thorn designer as an aversion to front discs. He seems to think the forks will break with continued use!
Johnh

That's not really fair John, was it meant as humour? 
His opinion of discs is pretty clear in the mega brochure.  He certainly does not think the forks Thorn bikes come fitted with will break.

[leftpoole]

I’m certain that at some point previously Andy told me and had written that discs were not safe as the force distribution was affecting the weak part of the fork.
I loveThorn bikes and as is known I have more than one. But they are certainly over built to be able to have such a good warranty. If a manufacturer builds strong and tough then a long term warranty can be given.
I certainly do not like or want disc brakes. A personal point of view unaffected by anything.
Was the comment in humour? Maybe
Happy New Year
John
PS:- I don’t post very often because I seem to cause conflict. I do however post truthfully.