Thorn in my side...

Please be fair and thoughtful in your opinions. No rants please.
fatboy
Posts: 3477
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 1:32pm
Location: North Hertfordshire

Re: Thorn in my side...

Post by fatboy »

I re-read the review and I still think that it reads to be generally favourable and actually the most favourable that I have read. The issue with toe-overlap is possibly a bit misleading in that the bike didn't really fit either of the two reviewers (which is mentioned and any bike purchased should better fit an individual) but probably does no harm in providing an area for discussion in the specification of the bike (even for just Thorn to reassure).

As an asside I think that I'd like to see a comparative review done rather than one tourer every 6 months. Cycling plus tend to do these and they could be good if the reviews were performed with the knowledge and riggor of Cycle magazine.
"Marriage is a wonderful invention; but then again so is the bicycle puncture repair kit." - Billy Connolly
Regulator
Posts: 523
Joined: 27 Jan 2007, 10:13am

Re: Thorn in my side...

Post by Regulator »

I have no reason to question Chris' independence and thoroughness. The fact that he is willing to give a less than glowing review to a major advertiser shows that he is influenced by external matters.

The fact that Thorn then whinge about the review perhaps says more about Thorn than anything else...
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Thorn in my side...

Post by reohn2 »

I haven't read the test ,but as the owner of a Thorn Audax Mk3 I don't think there would be an acre of difference between it and the Club Tour in geometry so just a couple of thoughts.
My TA3 handles very well and is very comfortable,as for toe overlap,I bought the medium/large size,I dithered between that and Large but the top tube length decided it in the end 575mm for med/large,595 for large.I'm 6ft tall and take shimano 47's cycling shoes my toes jjjjust breeze the front mudguard,thats with 28mm tyres and the 'guard set with 15/18mm of clearance.
The bike is set up with a 120mm stem,but if I'd have gone for the Large size the extra 20mm of top tube that would give me 20mm more toe overlap and the same reach with a 100mm stem.
I would buy the same size again.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
User avatar
Kevin K
Posts: 380
Joined: 21 Oct 2007, 1:41am
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow

Re: Thorn in my side...

Post by Kevin K »

Regulator wrote:I have no reason to question Chris' independence and thoroughness. The fact that he is willing to give a less than glowing review to a major advertiser shows that he is influenced by external matters.
I agree.

Regulator wrote:The fact that Thorn then whinge about the review perhaps says more about Thorn than anything else...
It's unfair to say Thorn were whinging; they were simply pointing out that new frames have double eyelets.

Jonty wrote:The thing which hit me between the eyes was the reference under the heading "The Rivals" to the Hewitt Cheviot SE. This read "Pay and extra £100 for better components (generally Deore XT) on an even nicer frame (in my opinion) with a similar custom fitting service. The down-side is a far less inviting and informative website than Thorn's." When I buy a bike I want the money in the bike not the website!
But it's also useful to understand what is being offered and what the options are. I for one like to do this in my own time using a brochure or website, then call the supplier for more information when I'm ready to order. Hewitt were very good when visiting the shop, but this is not something everyone can do. Thorn are excellent at answering queries and providing information. Both are somewhat opinionated!
Kevin K. Glasgow
User avatar
Kevin K
Posts: 380
Joined: 21 Oct 2007, 1:41am
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow

Re: Thorn in my side...

Post by Kevin K »

reohn2 wrote:The bike is set up with a 120mm stem,but if I'd have gone for the Large size the extra 20mm of top tube that would give me 20mm more toe overlap and the same reach with a 100mm stem. I would buy the same size again.
Wouldn't the larger size have given less toe overlap?
Kevin K. Glasgow
yakdiver
Posts: 1466
Joined: 12 Jul 2007, 2:54pm
Location: North Baddesley Hampshire

Re: Thorn in my side...

Post by yakdiver »

I've got aThorn Club Tour and I have size 9 plates and I have no toe overlap
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Thorn in my side...

Post by reohn2 »

Kevin K wrote:
reohn2 wrote:The bike is set up with a 120mm stem,but if I'd have gone for the Large size the extra 20mm of top tube that would give me 20mm more toe overlap and the same reach with a 100mm stem. I would buy the same size again.
Wouldn't the larger size have given less toe overlap?


Yes,but as I don't have toe overlap now there isn't a problem,I suppose you could say more clearance is better but if,due to SPD's,my toe to mudguard distance is fixed I don't see I need the bigger clearance,if I wish I could make more clearance by tightening up the 15mm m/guard to tyre distance but don't want to.
The bike fits perfectly.

The point of my post was to highlight the fact that on a Med/Large frame a chap with big feet has no toe overlap and my bet is I'm in the minority for 47's shoe size,so a chap with 44/45 size shoes would have more clearance.If he rode 25mm tyres(I ride 28's) and or wanted less clearance between mudguard and tyre, the gap gets bigger with every adjustment.
BTW I also ride 175mm cranks too so thats another 5mm saved for someone of smaller size who,as most do, rides 170mm cranks.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
glueman
Posts: 4354
Joined: 16 Mar 2007, 1:22pm

Re: Thorn in my side...

Post by glueman »

Oddly enough my new(ish) Mercian has a fair bit of toe overlap with guards, 170mm cranks and my size 8 feet. The other Mercians I've owned didn't, so I assumed this wouldn't. I'd like to say it doesn't matter but it can be a pain, especially on hills with sharp corners where you have to pedal 360 degrees and turn (and in my case weave the front wheel about) at the same time. However it's such a perfectly neutral handling beast - the highest accolade I can give a frame - that I live with this foible. If I ordered again I'd spec a bike without overlap because I don't think it's necessary on an average 22 1/2" frame.

Always worth checking before you order.
User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 56359
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Thorn in my side...

Post by Mick F »

When I ordered my Mercian, I'd never heard of Toe Overlap. I can't believe that a frambuilder would even contemplate making a frame that has it! If mine had it, I would have been VERY disappointed.

I'm with CJ on this, it should be outlawed.


Just measured mine, as a matter of interest:
170mm cranks/Size9 feet = more than an inch of clear blue sky between toes and mudguard! :D
Mick F. Cornwall
pq
Posts: 1294
Joined: 12 Nov 2007, 11:41pm
Location: St Antonin Noble Val, France
Contact:

Re: Thorn in my side...

Post by pq »

My take on it is the reverse.

I'd never heard of toe overlap either, but when I did hear about it discovered that almost all my bikes have it. They have it because I ride a small frame with a short top tube and because I tend to like racier frames. In 20 odd years of having the "problem" I'd never noticed it.

A few years back I ordered a custom road frame, and mentioned that I expected it to have toe overlap because all my bikes have it. When it arrived, it didn't have overlap. In order to achieve that the design of the frame was compromised - the head angle was too slack and the fork rake too great so it rode like a barge.

So, in order to "cure" something that was never a problem in the first place, I've got a bike which rides like a barge. Not surprisingly, I'd sooner have the toe overlap. My view is that the whole overlap issue is totally overblown. All things being equal it's better not to have overlap of course, but it's not worth screwing up the frame design to achieve it.
One link to your website is enough. G
glueman
Posts: 4354
Joined: 16 Mar 2007, 1:22pm

Re: Thorn in my side...

Post by glueman »

pq wrote: When it arrived, it didn't have overlap. In order to achieve that the design of the frame was compromised - the head angle was too slack and the fork rake too great so it rode like a barge.

The only custom frame I've ever made suggestions on (not a Mercian) rode like a pig, and I've left it to the designers ever since. At the time I was doing a lot of long rides and said I wanted something slightly lazier than the race bikes audaxers were usually modelled on. From my lips to the jig something went amiss because the bike had a very slack head angle with almost straight forks. Fine on a tandem but a nightmare on a solo, especially downhill, with lots of steering adjustment and cold sweats. I'd never felt genuine relief at getting to the bottom of a hill in one piece before.

Although the Mercian gets its mudguards kicked pretty frequently, it has no other bad habits and fits like a glove.
leftpoole
Posts: 1492
Joined: 12 Feb 2007, 9:31am
Location: Account closing 31st July '22

Re: Thorn in my side...

Post by leftpoole »

Hello
As I have said previously, no Thorn tourer has toe overlap. Chris Judden gave a bad review. I also feel that the Thorn response in this months Cycle magazine is not tough enough on the magazine and should have had a real go at CTC!Having said that, I think Thorn should have sent CTC a proper bike up to date not old obsolete stock. They should also have sent a letter telling CTC that it was older stock with a reason stating why the frame only had one rear eylet. Plus CTC should have read Thorn advertising specification and queried the bike they had been given.
My opinion as a four Thorn bike owner and previous owner of another three! ( I cannot for the life of me understand why all cyclists do not ride Thorn bikes!!!!!) Experienced rider of some years and past owner of many brands and types of cycle.
John.
Last edited by leftpoole on 2 Dec 2009, 2:36pm, edited 1 time in total.
glueman
Posts: 4354
Joined: 16 Mar 2007, 1:22pm

Re: Thorn in my side...

Post by glueman »

leftpoole wrote: Plus CTC should have read Thorn advertising specification and queried the bike they had been given...


On what planet is it the reviewers responsibility to check whether the bike they've been sent is current specification. Thorn are getting a free advertisement in a magazine targeted at their core customer if they produced a bike that is, as they've said, the 'best in the world'. If Thorn deal in hyperbole they are inviting a reviewer to point out where they fall short of the ideal.

leftpoole wrote:
( I cannot for the life of me understand why all cyclists do not ride Thorn bikes!!!!!)



Many reasons I would imagine. They've never managed to acquire the kudos of George Longstaff, Dave Yates, Robin Mather and others in spite of their top bikes being in a similar price bracket. Hewitt give Thorn a run for their money in the UK designed, overseas built middle market, Mercian's off-the-peg machines eat into Thorn's steel frame customer (and have infinitely more attractive finishes) and most makers use similar tubing, will fit brazings for accessories, and allow for individuality without the grandiose claims Thorn go in for.
Thorn are also prone to messianic zeal over the next-big-thing, whether that be 26" touring wheels or Rohloff hubs, which only works if you are dealing with relative newcomers to cycling who haven't formed their own opinions on what they prefer. Indeed, I'd say Thorn set their stall out to attract newbies and hope they stick around for the long haul.

As I said previously, I have nothing against the bikes and some, like the childback tandems and Audax Mk III, offer excellent VFM and they have a sensibly wide range of sizes off the peg, but the greatest touring bike in the world schtick is wearing very thin.
User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 56359
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Thorn in my side...

Post by Mick F »

leftpoole wrote:Hello
As I have said previously, no Thorn tourer has toe overlap.

CJ said it did have toe overlap.
You say they don't.

Who's right?

leftpoole wrote:I still say that Chris Judden has it wrong! There is no toe overlap. This is a particular thing that Andy Blance the designer and Thorn are so positive about.


Mick F wrote:I have no reason to doubt what CJ says. How can he say there was overlap when their wasn't?

He said, in the article, " ..... found the resulting overlap between my toes and the front mudguard slightly annoying." If you look at the photograph at the start of the article, judging by the geometry, it doesn't look like he was wrong either.

I have no opinion one way or another about Thorn's bikes, and I don't care one way or another about their toe overlap. I just thought I'd chuck in my penny-worth.


Mick F wrote:As a matter of interest, on your Thorns, what is the distance from the centre of your BB to the centre of your front hub? (With the front wheel dead ahead of course!)

I ask as I'm interested why CJ would say there's toe overlap and you don't.

Mine is 23 3/4 inches in old money, or 603mm in that new-fangled measurement on my Mercian. I have nowhere near any toe overlap. I'd hate to ride a bike with overlap.


Any chance of an answer?
Mick F. Cornwall
User avatar
meic
Posts: 19355
Joined: 1 Feb 2007, 9:37pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Re: Thorn in my side...

Post by meic »

Both could easily be right.

It depends on mudguard spacing, foot size, overshoes, pedal type and a few other variables.
Yma o Hyd
Post Reply