Mercury or Nomad MK3 700c

[Nichwell]

Hello and many thanks for your help. I am looking for a bike for audaxing, general commuting and I hope some extensive touring in Europe. I am really drawn to a rohloff equipped bike for ease of maintenance however I have never used one. My initial thought was of the Mercury as it seems to be closest to what I was looking for. I would really welcome your thoughts and recommendations.
However Sarah at Sjs mentioned the Nomad MK3 700 and the fact that it is adaptable for derailleurs, rohloff or even belt drive. Now that is a big plus as that doesn't commit me to one particular system. But it does seem rather robust for what I have in mind. I read in the brochure that the Nomad loaded is roughly the same weight as the Mercury loaded but the Mercury is more lively. Now I am not sure I am too bothered about exciting handling but I am sure that I am at the age where hauling more weight than I need to up a hill is not what I want to do. I am not by any means a weight weenie and I have always preferred steel but equally if I don't need to I would rather not.

[PH]

Hi, welcome to the forum, they're both good bikes, here's my take on it:
I have both and although there's a lot of overlap I never have any indecision about which to choose for any given ride. 
The Mercury is more fun, all that subjective stuff, engaging, rewarding... I Audax and light tour on it, plus use it for all those on-road rides with light luggage where the main intention is to enjoy the cycling.
The Nomad is more sure footed, a bit dull, maybe even boring, though sometimes that's exactly what I want.  I use it as a day to day bike, for anything involving off road, and touring that requires more than a change of clothes. It occasionally tows a trailer and if I need to park it somewhere it might get knocked I have the impression it'll withstand that better than the Merc.
If I were to do the same ride on both, I'd enjoy the cycling more on the Mercury and the scenery more on the Nomad, it isn't a question of better but different.  Having said that, there's no ride I've done that I couldn't have done on the other, I've done a 200km Audax on the Nomad and a couple of camping trips on the Mercury, I never felt that the bikes were not capable of it, just that they weren't ideal.
Don't worry about the weight, at least nowhere near the top of the list, it's a consequence of design and it's that which effects the feel. rather than the grams.  In a similar spec they could easily be brought to within a kg of each other, so in terms of effort/propulsion the difference is negligible.  Unloaded, the Mercury is more comfortable, the Nomad is noticeably stiffer, you can mitigate that with tyre and wheel size, but then you widen the difference in other ways. I can swap wheels and forks between mine, get the weight down to a 800g difference, but in their usual configuration there's 3.2kg between them. 
The Mercury is my favorite bike, the Nomad my most ridden. Which would suit you better depends on which part of your riding you prioritise, what touring you plan, how much Audaxing, how you ride, what you like... On paper the Nomad is a better do it all bike, but for me a lot of that stuff could just as well be done on a cheap hack, so I would choose the Mercury. 

It is mostly opinion of course and there's a nice broad range of that on this forum.  We won't all reach the same conclusions, we'll all have our own preferences and subjective tests, though the physics is the same for everyone.

[iGom]

I went through much the same process some months ago.  I’ve wanted a Rohloff bike for ages, although always deterred by the expense, and earlier this year decided if I didn’t get one soon it would be too late (age!).  I have a lovely Thorn Audax which has been my go-to bike for 15 years and I wanted something similar, but with straight bars.  I’ve used the Audax for long day rides, moving-on B&B tours and even moving-on camping  tours - ensuring I take as little as I find possible (still two panniers & a lightweight tent).  I’ve done two similar camping trips with my Mercury and it’s been great.  They were not moving-on, but the rides of ~50 miles to & from the campsites were fine.
I also have a heavy-duty touring bike, more suited to four panniers and a bigger = heavier tent.  I’m sure I will still be using that sometimes.
I had a similar discussion with Sarah, but after a little thought remembered I was looking for something Audax-like, so stuck with the Mercury.  No regrets.
Remember that Thorn offer a long trial period – 90 days I think it was.
Final caveat – you have to make your own decision of course.  But I’m sure they are both great bikes.

[JohnR]

Frames of essentially the same weight can be designed for different loads through choice of tubing size. How strong and heavy are you? I bought a Mercury thinking it would be the ideal bike on account of the Rohloff hub but didn't appreciate that it was designed for significantly more load (including myself) than I would ever put on it so the result was a fairly firm ride although 50mm tyres on 650b wheels helped. IIRC the design maximum load of a Mercury is 120kg (rider + baggage) but I never exceeded 75kg. Given the deteriorating state of UK roads it's nice to have a bike which isn't so stiff that it tries to shake your teeth out but that stiffness is needed to carry a big load. However, it wasn't a bad bike and I clocked up nearly 8k miles on it before it was rehomed. My current Rohloff bike is a DIY fitting of the hub onto a frame designed for derailleur gears (more here if you want to read it https://thorncyclesforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=14396.0).

Before the Mercury I had another bike with a belt drive (and the Rohloff hub that I'm currently using). I had bought that thinking it would be a very low maintenance bike but riding it through a winter resulted in an ever-increasing amount of creaking noises. Eventually I gave the belt a good scrub and the bike became quiet again - not as low maintenance as I had expected. I subsequently rode my Mercury which I had fitted with a Hebie Chainglider (discussed elsewhere on this forum) through a winter with far less maintenance. Before you embark on a belt drive bike you need to be confident about the gearing ratio you want to use as the parts are expensive and any change to the gearing involves replacing two of the three drivetrain components. Given your plan to use the bike for different task then you may need different gearing depending on the load and the anticipated cycling conditions. Changing the gearing on a normal Rohloff bike is much cheaper.

Subject to not exceeding the loading recommendation, the Mercury would be ideal for the touring you envisage but less good at the other tasks. If you are a lightweight person then consider the Mk 4 Audax which is Rohloff-compatible. It has a more compliant frame but limited to narrower tyres than the Mercury.

[Nichwell]

Thank you very much indeed. Exactly the sort of help I was looking for. I think that whilst a test ride could be helpful, I don't think I could really make a reasonable selection without the sort of experience that is on offer here. JohnR in answer to your query I am returning to cycling seriously after quite a long lay off with knee trouble. During that time I have accumulated a lot of flab but not much strength! Unfortunately, I don't think I will have problems with the frame being too stiff. Thanks for the views on the belt drive. I was really in too minds about it anyway and I think the cost of changing gears has made up my mind on that score.
PH you mention changing forks and wheels, would you mind giving more detail? I ask because I am considering buying a frame set rather than a complete bike and building it up partly for that reason and partly as it is less likely to be immediately noticed by my beloved and cause problems with the domestic bliss. Downside of course is not being able to take advantage of thorn's generous returns policy.

[PH]

PH you mention changing forks and wheels, would you mind giving more detail?

I can run either bike as 700c with a front rim brake or 650B with a disc, they're a lot closer to each other when wearing the same fork, brake, wheels and tyres.  It wouldn't really be fair to compare them in completely different specs.  The differences noted in my first post are apparent in any spec, but more pronounced as they diverge.  If I were to have the Nomad as my only bike, I'd choose 700c and probably a rim brake fork.  I can't imagine only having the Mercury.  Having two allowed me to experiment and then build them differently, this would be the case whatever the bikes were. Thorn have widened the appeal with different configurations of each, while contracting the range of models.  In my opinion these two bikes are still best as they were originally offered, the Mercury as a Sports Tourer and the Nomad as a full on Tourer towards the expedition end of the spectrum.

There's also the price, though the most expensive route would be to get the wrong one.  However, the Nomad used to be £250 cheaper than the Mercury and they're now the same price.  I suspect this is only because the Mercurys are still at pre pandemic prices and if they ever re-stock the differential will be restored.  That'd be a poor reason to choose, but I think you'd feel you'd got more for your money with a Mercury.

OT - The custom bike I had before the Mercury sat somewhere between the two, not as good at the extremes, but it covered more of the middle ground than either.  I think that's just how it is, the better a bike is at a specific thing, the less of an all-rounder it's going to be. 

[martinf]

Hello and many thanks for your help. I am looking for a bike for audaxing, general commuting and I hope some extensive touring in Europe. I am really drawn to a rohloff equipped bike for ease of maintenance however I have never used one.

I don't do audaxing as such, although I do have a bike that I use for lightly-loaded day rides on (mostly) good roads. This is a Raven Sport Tour, the predecessor to the Mercury, but in the 26" wheel size. Even for this use I have reasonably wide tyres for comfort, but fitted on lightweight, fairly narrow rims. I started with 35 mm Kojaks (not a particularly efficient tyre despite the sporty look), then tried 28 mm Continentals, which gave a quicker but harsher ride, and finally moved to Marathon Supreme in 42 mm width, which are a good performance/comfort compromise for me and also work quite well on badly maintained minor roads, towpaths and similar. I can do lightly-loaded tours on this bike, but to make it suitable for multi-day camping tours I would have to change the setup, so I have another bike for that.

On my very old 700C lightweight I have Continental Grand Prix 5000 tyres in the 32 mm size. These have very low rolling resistance and are OK for comfort so long as I only use the bike on good roads. These tyres would probably a good choice for serious Audax riding on a 700C Mercury.

For loaded touring I have a Raven Tour (designed for heavily loaded touring, but with slightly less capacity than the current Nomad frame) kitted out with front and rear racks, heavier and wider rims and with wider tyres. I usually use Marathon Supreme in 50 mm width, these roll quite well on tarmac and cope reasonably on moderate off-road tracks and paths. But I could go a bit wider and fit Marathon Mondial in 55 mm width if I ever plan a tour using lots of rough tracks.

Being retired I don't do commuting any more, but when I did I would use any of my bikes, with a biais towards a lightweight bike with efficient tyres when I had a long commute of 22 km each way. This probably depends on the state of the roads on your commute - if this is in an area with lots of metal and glass debris and potholes wider tyres with good puncture protection would be a better choice.

[mickeg]

If your plans for "extensive touring" in Europe are carrying a camping load, the bike that will serve you best for that will be heavier with a stiffer frame, heavier rims, and with lower gearing than the best bike for audaxing.

My point is that you might want to consider two bikes, or more.  I have a Nomad Mk II for heavy touring, but I would never consider using this bike for randonneuring. 

The bike I use for randonneuring has a derailleur system with a triple crank and would not serve me well for camping, frame is too flexible and the lowest gear is too high to carry camping gear up a steep hill.  The tires are too narrow for carrying more than the lightest load, a heavy load would cause too many pinch flats on these tires.

But, I have the storage space for more than one bike.  I have three bikes that are used for touring.  My point is that if you want to enjoy an activity, you are best served by having the right kind of equipment for that activity instead of trying to have one bike for all purposes.

Since a Rohloff wheel is not cheap, I understand that you might want to only have one bike if you want to exclusively use a Rohloff, but that limits you in other ways.  I only have one Rohloff bike. 

[JohnR]

Hello and many thanks for your help. I am looking for a bike for audaxing, general commuting and I hope some extensive touring in Europe.

I would add that I wouldn't want to use a Thorn bike with a Rohloff hub for commuting unless there's very secure bike storage. The magpies will be attracted by any new bike and it's an expensive loss should the bike go astray.

[martinf]

I would add that I wouldn't want to use a Thorn bike with a Rohloff hub for commuting unless there's very secure bike storage. The magpies will be attracted by any new bike and it's an expensive loss should the bike go astray.

I've been lucky with secure bike storage for the vast majority of my commutes.

I did once have a coworker complain about me bringing a bike into the office hallway, he said if I could bring my bike inside, why couldn't he bring his car inside? I replied that it would be OK, so long as he carried his car to take it inside like I did with my bike. 

For times when I need to leave a bike in a much less secure place I have two solutions :

- an old second-hand bike with (hopefully) very low theft appeal. Originally an old ladies mixte frame that I got for free, set up with 5 speed derailleur gearing using an old derailleur that still worked reasonably well. I left some rust spots on that frame. Nowadays I have a very old 650B wheel bike converted to use a 5 speed Sturmey-Archer hub, the latter dating from the early 1980's.   

- I get round the need to leave the bike by using my lightweight Brompton that I can take with me, bagged if I need to disguise the fact that it is a bicycle.

[Nichwell]

Thanks very much indeed for the advice. At the moment I am leaning very much towards the Mercury, but still dithering slightly. I will email SJS and see how long it will be for the Mercury frames to come back into stock and use that to make final decision. I am lucky with commuting, I leave the bike in the corner of the staffroom and as the headteacher also cycles nobody complains.

[martinf]

Thanks very much indeed for the advice. At the moment I am leaning very much towards the Mercury, but still dithering slightly.

Maybe start with a second-hand Mercury and see whether:

- you like the Rohloff. I do, but it doesn't suit everyone.
- the Mercury is suitable for your planned mix of riding.

For me the question mark would be the "extensive touring" requirement, but that depends on how you do it. I tend to carry rather a lot of stuff (cooking equipment, waterbag, etc.) for a long camping tour, and I go off-road at times, so I would favour the Nomad.

But for a long time I used my 700C lightweight with derailleur gears for everything.

[PH]

Thanks very much indeed for the advice. At the moment I am leaning very much towards the Mercury, but still dithering slightly. I will email SJS and see how long it will be for the Mercury frames to come back into stock and use that to make final decision.

I just looked on the SJS website, I hadn't realised the stock situation was so low.  It looks like they haven't re-stocked since before the pandemic, be interesting to see what they say.
IMO, these two bikes are different enough that I wouldn't substitute one for the other, in either direction.  I'd also agree with Martin that if your touring is with full kit the Nomad is the better choice and I think 650B the better wheel size.   

[in4]

I think there’s a used Raven on SJS at the moment. If it’s your size might be a great option for you. Hmm a Nomad 565L was there too.

[SteveM]

I have been riding the Mercury with Rohloff on 700c wheels for some time.  Stripping it back and going for narrower tires (mine are Conti Ride Tour 42mm), it would be a very nice Audax bike.  It’s sporty enough.  I have a Nomad Mk 2 with Rohloff for  touring, it’s heavier but solid as a rock.  As the wise ones say, there is overlap but for me Mercury is fast, Nonad is more leisurely (which I love).