Mercury forks

[Bill C]

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.

seems a fair comment to me

from a thread a few years back the quote was from a previous mega brochure

"We do not (and will not) fit disc brakes to resilient steel forks. The leverage of the caliper on the rotor can pry the wheel from its dropout. A through axle dropout (and hub) would prevent this but, to fit one, we would have to use very large diameter blades; these would then be horribly uncomfortable to ride, there is enough rubbish on the market without us adding to it!"

http://thorncyclesforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=12571.0

also jags mentioned gates drive that idea was poo pooed at the time, now theres the Nomad mk3

[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.

seems a fair comment to me

from a thread a few years back the quote was from a previous mega brochure

"We do not (and will not) fit disc brakes to resilient steel forks. The leverage of the caliper on the rotor can pry the wheel from its dropout. A through axle dropout (and hub) would prevent this but, to fit one, we would have to use very large diameter blades; these would then be horribly uncomfortable to ride, there is enough rubbish on the market without us adding to it!"

http://thorncyclesforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=12571.0

also jags mentioned gates drive that idea was poo pooed at the time, now theres the Nomad mk3

But things do change.  For example at the time that was written Reynolds were not offering fork blades they deemed compatible with disc brakes, they do now. 
John's comment was in the present tense and whatever may have been true in the past isn't necessarily so now.
Another change of opinion has been the EBB design, they were dismissive of the clamp option, then introduced it as a four bolt design on the Mercury and it's now a two bolt design on the Nomad. 

[Pavel]

So very true that things change, and Thorn has slowly changed along with new technologies. 

What I feel needs to be noted is how rare it is for a company to cary on with a conservative traditional approach.  One of the banes of the cycling world is the silly fads that mask as progress for a year or three, and then fade into a dead-end, fork.  Planned obsolescence is the same annoyance, so obvious, but aside from a very few companies such as Thorn, the constant churning out of new parts and systems is seen as the way to make money.

Thorn instead is small island where quality, reliability and a real world cycling experience are offered in an ocean of racing oriented cycling.  To me honest, if it were not for Thorn, I'd be done with cycling, most likely. That tall steerer and Mount Olympus sized stack of rings, so often derided in "some" other forums, is my ticket to cycling in my more advanced years.

So, sure, we can point back at Andy's suspicion of unproven technologies and the slow rate of change, but in my book, that's something to be highly valued.

- Pavel

[lewis noble]

Some interesting observations in this thread.  Peoples' perceptions of Thorn have interested me over the years, sometimes seen as making excellent reliable products, sometimes as 'stick in the mud' and behind the times.  In around 2009, I sold my Raven Tour - never used in the way it was built for - and bought a Cube hardtail from one of the leading bike shops in my home town.  Nice bike, liked it.  When choosing it, I commented to the main sales guy that I had had a Thorn - he then waffled on about how resistant they were to new ideas, fancy being against discs etc etc  . . . He only shut up when I replaced the Cube in the rack and made to leave.

(I went off that bike shope in a big way when they promised a 'detailed check' after a few weeks use.  I took the bike back for that, the mechanic accidentally left the workshop door open; he picked up the bike, shook it vigourously, and dumped it against the bench - then made a cup of tea.  15 mins later, he came back and said he had checked it thoroughly etc etc.  I have not been back since.  The bike shop I now use, when I need to, speak highly of Thorn and seem experienced with their products).

The Cube was a nice bike, hydraulic discs etc., but was stolen 6 months after I bought it.  When hunting around for a replacement, and thinking about a Cube hybrid, I noticed that Thorn were selling a 'spare time build' Ripio in my size . . . .bought it, loved it, only sold it on 6 yrs later when my riding became much more road focused.

The only 'problem' I have ever had with Thorn bikes in 13 years is with the ceramic rims on my original Raven Tour - coating deteriorated and came off the rims.  Andy offered to replace, no arguement, with new CSS rims, which served me very well and the new owner rode them to Vietnam.  My dtr-in-law's gravel bike has caused her more problems in 2 yrs that my Thorns ever have - disc brakes, gears, etc etc. 

So I think Thorn's are absolutely right to be cautious, and outline their reservations clearly - but once proven, and as products improve with development, they are offered. 

For me, I'm happy with rim brakes (just spent part of afternoon fitting Salmon pads to cope better with wet weather city riding) and I really hope that the 'basic' choices (e.g. Sherpa, Raven) remain available - for my riding, they suit me fine.

And as far as the oringinal query re forks is concerned, I have had both standard and the 853 . . . . to be honest, I noticed little difference - probably because the larger tyres on the Sherpa absorb more vibration anyway - on the Audax, yes, I'm sure they help with comfort.  I specced the 853 forks on the Sherpa because I was keen to reduce weight as much as possible, and I have no complaints. 

Lewis

[Danneaux]

So I think Thorn's are absolutely right to be cautious, and outline their reservations clearly - but once proven, and as products improve with development, they are offered.

In my view, a nicely stated summary of Thorn's philosophy, Lewis.

Apart from the latest edition of the Thorn Mega Brochure ( http://www.sjscycles.com/thornpdf/thorn_mega_brochure.pdf ), now referred to as the "Thorn Touring Bike Bible", there are some other resources that also detail Thorn's evolving design philosophy wrt to recent developments.

In the latest (Autumn 2019) edition of _Living With A Rohloff_...
http://www.sjscycles.com/thornpdf/ThornLivingWithARohloff.pdf
...Thorn designer Andy Blance explains a bit more his feelings on the latest developments and how they have entered the current models -- and his reservations. For highlights, see pages...
28 -- 2019 Changes including some in-depth comments re: Nomad Mk 3...and loss of the S&S coupler option.
32-35 -- Updates on Rohloff issues and a further explanation of changes in Rohloff's warranty coverage and need for hub registration.
36-37 -- Gates belt drive vs. Chains
38 -- Rear disc brakes, spoke counts and a derailleur fallback option for the Nomad Mk3.
39 -- More on Thorn's Rohloff warranty overlay and explicit cautions wrt oil changes, need to avoid pressure washing or submerging the hubs.
40 -- A move toward greater endorsement of the EX (external) shift-box.
43 -- More details on the new double-clamping eccentric BB shell (evolution of the one first seen on the older Mercury's mini-eccentric). The Mercury Mk3, Nomad Mk3 and RavenTwin Mk3 tandem all use this new shell design.
...with a number of new personal trip summaries and information.

Similarly, even if you aren't particularly interested in a Thorn Rohloff-equipped tandem, the RavenTwin brochure (Spring 2019 edition)...
http://www.sjscycles.com/thornpdf/ThornRavenTwinBroHiRes.pdf
...is well worth a read because it further explains Andy's evolving stance on some key developments on pages...
5 -- Spoke count with Rohloff hubs/wheels.
5-6 -- Disc forks, preference for 26in wheel size for tandem/heavy applications
7 -- New ED coated/treated fork steerer to better combat corrosion. See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrophoretic_deposition.
8 -- Increasing support for straight handlebars, less so for drops.
12-13 -- Deeper thoughts on discs vs. v-brakes.

There's more in both these revised publications that will answer many questions about Thorn's recent changes and how they evolved from the previous designs.

Best,

Dan.

[mickeg]

I have a lot of opinions on bikes and bike components, but not many about Thorn as a company.  I have never been to the UK, thus have never seen their store, etc.  I built up my two Thorns from parts, thus SJS recommendations for components, etc. are not anything I have much of an opinion on because I was choosing my components based on what was available to me in USA. 

Bottom line, when I build up a touring bike I want it to be robust, easily repairable, parts that are easily replaceable (and obtainable), and the utmost in reliability.  My opinions do not always match Thorns opinions, but overall I think our opinions are quite similar. 

I thought Thorn's recommendation against drop bars on the Nomad Mk II a bit odd, but they had an 590M size frame that had the size and geometry that I wanted for a drop bar bike.  So, I did not let their recommendation against my build plans bother me.  I still am not sure why they recommend against drop bars, I can't imagine trying to ride a fully loaded touring bike into 30 or 40 km/hr headwinds with upright bars.  But I am happy with the way I built up that drop bar bike so I really do not need to know why they suggest upright bars.

There is one exception to my lack of opinions on Thorn and their recommendations for parts and components.  I ordered Andra 30 rims and 2.25 inch width tires when I ordered my Nomad frame.  I blindly accepted Thorn's recommendation for the Andra 30 for heavy duty touring.  That was my mistake, I did not research the rim further on my own, instead I just accepted the Thorn recommendation.  if I had researched it further, I never would have ordered a rim that had an inner width of only 19mm for a bike that I planned to use 57mm wide tires on.

I eventually decided to buy a set of CSS Andra 40 rims and put those on my Nomad instead of the Andra 30 CSS rims that I have.  But in the process of trying to order such rims, I could not find any mention of CSS on the Ryde website  That was when we learned that CSS rims are no longer being made.  I do not want to lose the CSS rims, thus I reluctantly decided to keep the Andra 30 rims on my Nomad when I learned that I could not order any Andra 40 CSS rims to replace them.

This whole discussion started because of Thorn's opinions on disc brakes on forks, but that is a topic I really have no opinion on.  My only disc brake bike has a disc on the rear and a rim brake on the front, and that is not even a Thorn bike. I built it with a rim brake fork as a cost saving measure.

[Andre Jute]

Thanks for selecting the highlights of an important document, Dan.

Not many designers will give one as much insight into their minds as Andy Blance does; it should be said in their defence that in many cases their masters will consider what's in the designer's head as proprietary information. I had an example of this when I wanted to use as an illustration in a book some calculations for the chassis of a large and very successful -- over a hundred sold at Rolls-Royce prices --nostalgicar I designed for a famed British builder: when my publisher advised him as a courtesy that I would be doing this, he sent a lawyer's letter... A few weeks later he called to ask whether I was interested in designing the chassis for a small sports car, and I asked him about the kerfuffle with the lawyer. He replied, "I'm not paying you to help my bloody competitors!" I said, "You should rather see it as a gauntlet thrown down, a challenge to compete with a standard they cannot possibly meet." He wasn't impressed: "Copycats have no shame." A master-builder of sports-racing cars, Major Mallock, gladly provided me with some insights into his thinking, which I published as a two-page box-out; I later heard it did him some commercial good.

Messrs Thorn and Blance are to be commended on understanding that they too are throwing down the gauntlet, and that it is good business, attracting customers: Mr Blance tells us so again and again. Here's one on p39:

Unique to Thorn - another
astonishing promise!
10 year warranty on the hub’s internal gear mechanism
We’re convinced that your Rohloff hub is so unlikely to
ever let you down that, as from 1 Jan 2018 we make this promise:-
Our promise - if you have an insurmountable problem with the internal
mechanism of your Rohloff hub, which prevents completion of your tour, contact us and we’ll act promptly.
If you’re in a remote area, we’ll send you a new wheel, we’ll send this entirely at our expense, to the closest settlement served by an international courier (DHL, UPS etc). If you’re closer to home, we’ll collect your wheel from you - at our expense, we’ll repair (or replace it) and return it to you, free of charge, generally within 7 working days for UK customers and within 14 working days for overseas customers.

Or this consistent policy -- complete with taunting commentary:

Please also note; we allow you a
“100 day, money back if, not delighted” trial
period, with our Rohloff bike - who else has
such confidence in their product?

[Prince of Darkness]

I thought Thorn's recommendation against drop bars on the Nomad Mk II a bit odd, but they had an 590M size frame that had the size and geometry that I wanted for a drop bar bike.  So, I did not let their recommendation against my build plans bother me.  I still am not sure why they recommend against drop bars, I can't imagine trying to ride a fully loaded touring bike into 30 or 40 km/hr headwinds with upright bars.  But I am happy with the way I built up that drop bar bike so I really do not need to know why they suggest upright bars.

If I recall correctly, Thorn's position on drop bars changed when they started making the Raven bikes with Rohloff hubs. Pretty sure that they were strongly in favour of drops prior to this. I suspect it is Rohloff only offer a twist grip changer and they did not feel that there was a way to use Rohloff with drops that was both elegant and efficient. Of course it could just be that they changed their minds . Personally, I like drops and far prefer them to straight bars. My solution to combining drops with Rohloff was to use a Minoura accessory bar; it's not elegant, but it did allow me to place the shifter in what I consider to be the optimum position. Probably possible to get the same position, or very close to it, with one of Thorn's own accessory bars, which would certainly be neater!

[PH]

I've never been a fan of the mega brochure, too much hype and running down of others for my liking.  That it's now called a Bible I find offensive, Thorn make nice bikes, they're not Gods.
Some of it is nonsense, they berate other wheel builders for not following Rohloff's instructions, when Thorn frequently disregarded them and go their own way.  Just look at the bikes in the brochures, the wheel builds differ.  Mine is built in a way that the reinforcing rings, that Rohloff recommend, can't be fitted and 1X rather than the Rohloff recommended 2X - I'm not questioning their expertise, but they can't then dismiss others for doing something they do themselves.
Their redeeming feature IMO is that they stand behind their products, the latest examples being the way their warranties go beyond the manufacturers.  I don't really care how my wheel is built, I do care that it'll get sorted if there's a problem.
As for the idea that Thorn are conservative, there might be some truth in that in some things, but the way they promoted the Rohloff above all else was pretty bold.  At a time when hardly anyone in the UK had even heard of it and other manufacturers were either dismissive or reluctant.  I don't know if Thorn would have survived if that had been a failure, it certainly would have been a huge knock and they wouldn't be the company they are today. 

[PH]

If I recall correctly, Thorn's position on drop bars changed when they started making the Raven bikes with Rohloff hubs

I'm not sure that's right.  I nearly bought an original Nomad a couple of years before the Raven was launched, straight bars were pretty standard then.

[mickeg]

I thought Thorn's recommendation against drop bars on the Nomad Mk II a bit odd, but they had an 590M size frame that had the size and geometry that I wanted for a drop bar bike.  So, I did not let their recommendation against my build plans bother me.  I still am not sure why they recommend against drop bars, I can't imagine trying to ride a fully loaded touring bike into 30 or 40 km/hr headwinds with upright bars.  But I am happy with the way I built up that drop bar bike so I really do not need to know why they suggest upright bars.

If I recall correctly, Thorn's position on drop bars changed when they started making the Raven bikes with Rohloff hubs. Pretty sure that they were strongly in favour of drops prior to this. I suspect it is Rohloff only offer a twist grip changer and they did not feel that there was a way to use Rohloff with drops that was both elegant and efficient. Of course it could just be that they changed their minds . Personally, I like drops and far prefer them to straight bars. My solution to combining drops with Rohloff was to use a Minoura accessory bar; it's not elegant, but it did allow me to place the shifter in what I consider to be the optimum position. Probably possible to get the same position, or very close to it, with one of Thorn's own accessory bars, which would certainly be neater!

I tried a couple different places for the Rohloff twist grip shifter that placed the shifter pretty close to the steerer tube.  But on my Iceland tour there were several times when I was pedaling up a steep hill on gravel and cobbles and I found the desire to keep both hands on the handlebars for steering to be more important than my desire to downshift to a lower gear.  And it was on one of those hills that I decided when I got home I would get the Hubbub Adapter and put my twist grip shifter on the end of the handlebar on the right side.  That way on difficult terrain when I want to have both hands on the handlebars for steering control, I can also have one hand on the shifter.

I first started using bar end shifters on a derailleur bike in the 1980s.  At this time I have bar end shifters on three different derailleur bikes.  Thus, I find that having a Rohloff shifter on the end of the handlebar is a very logical place to put it, as on other bikes I am used to reaching to that location.  And have had the shifter there now for three years, have no desire to change it.  A photo below.