Touring - Surly LHT Complete vs. Surly Cross-Check Complete?

I'd like to purhcase one of these two, but can't decide which. I don't do fully-loaded touring. I do mainly credit card touring, centuries, and city riding. I'm on the short, light side. I appreciate a triple crankset. Should I go LHT? Should I go Cross-Check and add a third chainring? What do you think? Thanks for your help.

I wouldn't buy an LHT if I weren't doing fully loaded touring.

I'd get the CC and add the triple.

If you peruse the touring forums for long you'll see that there's been quite a few people who've done fully loaded touring with a Cross-check. I'm setting mine up for not only that but for commuting, randonneuring, and some trail-riding. It's a great bike.

But so is the LHT. In a recent issue of Adventure Cycling the LHT was reviewed and (was it Shubert that reviewed it?) the reviewer was surprised at how nimble and responsive it was when it wasn't loaded down. So...which to get? If I knew I was going to do a lot of loaded touring, the LHT is slightly better suited with it's longer chainstays, but if touring was only going to be an occasional event and I wanted a do-all bike, the Cross-check would still be my first choice.

There. Clear as mud!

And so the Cross-Check it'll be. Thanks for your help!

Can you test ride?

I think the LHT is the better all around bike except for trail riding, and even there it's that narrow segment of trail between something like an LHT's capabilites and and MTB. A CC bike is in the opposite direction from road, all your uses are road. Not sure how the body size issue relate, except you need a lightish bike.

I wouldn't buy an LHT if I weren't doing fully loaded touring.

i ride mine all over san francisco, and am loving it. track bike is now collecting dust

Before you buy that Cross Check, (a fine bike), test ride one of these...

http://www.bianchiusa.com/06_volpe.html

Another fun bike.

*Sigh*

Which mandatory bikes have we not yet plugged in this category? We've got the Cross-check, the LHT, now the Volpe. I suppose it's time to mention the Jamis Aurora and the Novara Randonee. There, now it has been said. I think it's required to point to all of those bikes in at least 25% of threads in the touring and commuting forums. Says so somewhere in the user agreement for the forum registration.

Oh my god, nobody said this:

If you want to spend a bit more money, the trek 520 is a great bike too (yep, still being made).

Ahhh, my job here is done.

My understanding is the main benefit of a committed touring bike (LHT) vs. a CX bike (CrossCheck) is the longer chainstay on the LHT. I'm sure this affects handling, but I've ridden both and can't 'feel' the difference. The longer chainstay also provides more heel clearance for panniers and room for fenders with a dual swing/traditional pull FD (on the CrossCheck you'll need this to upgrade to a triple; it fits, but just barely after some monkeying around with wheel and fender). Note: to upgrade a CrossCheck to a triple you'll need a 2mm BB spacer (around $2) or a 4mm wider BB (around $25 and up), a FD with triple capacity (around $30 and up), and an inner chainring (around $20).

Yesterday I got the 1400 cubic inch REI Commuter Panniers (http://www.rei.com/online/store/ProductDisplay?storeId=8000&catalogId=40000008000&productId=48116781&parent_category_rn=4500848&vcat=REI_SEARCH) for my Cross Check to use with my Jandd Expedition rack (http://www.jandd.com/detail.asp?PRODUCT_ID=FREXP). I have not commuted with them yet, but there's plenty of heel clearance so that won't be an issue.

People keep tellling me the BB may be too low on the LHT. I expect to ride mainly on pavement. Yet, a 54cm LHT has a drop of 1.9" vs. 2.6" for the CC, implying a higher BB than a 54cm CC? Am I understanding this correctly? If that's the case, it seems the BB shouldn't be an issue that would affect my decision. What do you think? What about responsiveness? Is it true an LHT would not be as responsive as a CC? Would the difference be meaningful? Again, I'm not going to ride off-road. Thanks for your help.

Are you able to test ride either one?

Even though I'm a fan of the Cross-Check (cuz I have one), those who have encouraged test rides are absolutely right. Just because I love the CC doesn't mean you will. You might fall for the Volpe or the 520 or the Aurora or, you get the idea. Test ride! I've test ridden tons of bikes over the years and without fail, the one I've purchased had "the feel". I just knew after only a few hundred feet that it felt right. So, if you can, do test rides.

I think JT52 really has a point here. Test riding bikes is free and "the feel" of the right bike makes it worth the money you're going to shell out.

Besides the bike itself, try to get a feel for the bike shop selling it. Do you think that they will stand behind the bike?

Also remember that most of the stuff you read on the internet is bull puckie.....this isn't a personal attack on anybody, but I would have too much faith in spending a $1000 on advice posted on this board alone.

Do your homework, test ride, have fun. Buy the bike for yourself....not whatever some self proclaimed bike guru tells you. (I am a self proclaimed bike guru, BTW)

People keep tellling me the BB may be too low on the LHT. I expect to ride mainly on pavement. Yet, a 54cm LHT has a drop of 1.9" vs. 2.6" for the CC, implying a higher BB than a 54cm CC? Am I understanding this correctly? If that's the case, it seems the BB shouldn't be an issue that would affect my decision. What do you think? What about responsiveness? Is it true an LHT would not be as responsive as a CC? Would the difference be meaningful? Again, I'm not going to ride off-road. Thanks for your help.

The Crosscheck uses 700C wheels a 54cm LHT uses 26" wheels that will explain the BB drop difference. The actual BB height on CC will be higher than the LHT.

i ride mine all over san francisco, and am loving it. track bike is now collecting dust

No doubt it's versatile, but it's made for touring. If you're not doing ANY loaded touring, there are so many other bikes that would better fit the bill.

I'm considering the Specialized Tricross Sport, a cross/touring bike with a triple crankset.

Have you compared this bike with the Cross-Check? I would be interested to hear which one looks better to you (or anyone else reading) and why.

(I haven't yet done a comparison, but so far I really like the Tricross.)

I've test ridden tons of bikes over the years and without fail, the one I've purchased had "the feel". I just knew after only a few hundred feet that it felt right. So, if you can, do test rides.


+1 enhanced

(Just be sure, though, that things like saddle height, stem, bars, tires, tire pressure, etc., and psychological factors (your own moods and attitudes or prejudices at the time of the test ride, salespeople's influences or pressures, and so on) are not getting in the way of a fair comparison.)

I've been struck by the way some bikes are just a joy to ride. This makes all the difference.
The way I'm beginning to see it, If the bike and I are going to be spending a lot of time together, there might as well be some kind of spark there.

I've had this internal dialouge and I'll plump for the LHT. I'm putting a child seat on the back and panniers on the front.

If the CC did the front panniers thing, I'd be in a world of indecision.

I've had this internal dialouge and I'll plump for the LHT. I'm putting a child seat on the back and panniers on the front.

If the CC did the front panniers thing, I'd be in a world of indecision.


Uh.... the Soma Double Cross does front panniers! It's like a Cross Check, but built out of 831 steel. It's "officially" a cyclocross bike I set mine up as a tourer and it was fantastic.... Has front fork rack-mount eyelets. Otherwise very similar to a Cross Check in philosophy and style.

Sam

Take a look at the Surly Pacer. It's what you're looking for.

Uh.... the Soma Double Cross does front panniers! It's like a Cross Check, but built out of 831 steel. It's "officially" a cyclocross bike I set mine up as a tourer and it was fantastic.... Has front fork rack-mount eyelets. Otherwise very similar to a Cross Check in philosophy and style.

Sam

Uhh it's tange chromoly steel, probably not much different than surly's. http://www.somafab.com/frames.html

I had bilenky braze some rack braze-ons but it was like 50 bucks :(

Taking some test rides is great, of course, but it's not really possible with bikes that have to be specially ordered, and the LHT is one such model: stores do not have it in stock. So people who are interested in the LHT have to read about other people's experience, here on the web.



Even though I'm a fan of the Cross-Check (cuz I have one), those who have encouraged test rides are absolutely right. Just because I love the CC doesn't mean you will. You might fall for the Volpe or the 520 or the Aurora or, you get the idea. Test ride! I've test ridden tons of bikes over the years and without fail, the one I've purchased had "the feel". I just knew after only a few hundred feet that it felt right. So, if you can, do test rides.

Just a reminder: touring isn't the only kind of riding that benefits from touring-bike geometry. Long chainstays are a real advantage for me everytime I haul groceries home.


No doubt it's versatile, but it's made for touring. If you're not doing ANY loaded touring, there are so many other bikes that would better fit the bill.

Personally, I would never buy a bike without a test ride, and I've got a good idea of what size I need in bike. I've seen way too many problems, wat too bikes not the right size, way too much money thrown away.

And I wouldn't believe half of what you read on this forum-- nothing personal, but the internet isn't the Holy Bible afterall.

Internet research isn't the first option to buying a bike. Don't get me wrong, the internet is a good tool, but bikes are a physical things.

... If the CC did the front panniers thing, I'd be in a world of indecision.

I'm not sure what you mean here. The CC will support front panniers with the right front rack. Though I don't have it yet, I plan on getting the Jandd Extreme (http://www.jandd.com/detail.asp?PRODUCT_ID=FREXT) front rack, which will work on the CC.

Just a reminder: touring isn't the only kind of riding that benefits from touring-bike geometry. Long chainstays are a real advantage for me everytime I haul groceries home.

+1 I get my groceries with a modified 80s schwinn prelude with Performance bike grocery getters. I get heel strike every once in a while and when I do, I have to pick up my food on the side of the road. Not fun. I'm currently, selling a lot of my older unused bicycle collection to buy a LHT. Hopefully Adams Avenue Bike shop in San Diego will have a LHT to test ride in my size.

No doubt it's versatile, but it's made for touring. If you're not doing ANY loaded touring, there are so many other bikes that would better fit the bill.

I have mine set up as a flatbar commuter, and I wouldn't trade it for anything that would "better fit the bill." In my mind, the LHT gives me the most options, with mounts for front and rear racks and fenders, plus the ability to take fatter tires for different conditions. It's the ultimate commuter, in my mind, and gives me the option to consider a ride down Alaska's Kenai Peninsula next summer, if I can swing the time off from the cubicle.

No doubt it's versatile, but it's made for touring. If you're not doing ANY loaded touring, there are so many other bikes that would better fit the bill.

Have you ridden an LHT? Or are you just pontificating based upon your personal understanding of how the world works?

I don't want to sound grumpy, but there seems to be some kind of belief, even in this forum, that a bicycle designed for loaded touring must handle like a Mack truck and be about as heavy. And that, therefore, it's way too specialized a design for anything else and you'd have to be crazy to want to ride it around for any other reason. Nothing could be further from the truth!

The kind of frame that works for loaded touring has very generalized, versatile road geometry. A well-designed loaded touring frame (of which the LHT is a fine example) is a joy to ride both loaded and unloaded. Handling is stable and predictable, but also a lot more nimble and responsive than you would expect. Throw in a low BB, and you get a bike that goes exactly where you point it, every single time, without twitchiness or hesitation. No need for it to be heavy, either. You can easily build a 25lb LHT. That's not light, but it's a lot lighter than my unladen 31lb touring rig. With a lot more effort (and money), a 20lb LHT would be possible, albeit pointless.

LHT geometry is perfect for pavement riding, unlike the Cross Check. The higher BB on the Cross Check gives it better clearance off-road, but this is a compromise of on-road handling stability. By the numbers, you get a better ride on the LHT. Clearance for wide tires on the LHT gives all the off-road capability most riders will ever need. If you're planning to ride anything more than nice, easy trails on a regular basis, that's when you need to consider something different.

Part of the problem here is that we're comparing only the Cross Check and the Long Haul Trucker complete bikes. I won't deny that there are bicycles better suited to the needs of the OP, but of the two options given, the Long Haul Trucker is clearly the superior choice. I would suggest expanding the search to other bicycles. Without even changing manufacturers, I can point to a frameset that would make a lot of sense for the OP's needs: the Surly Pacer (http://www.surlybikes.com/pacer.html). It's only available as a frameset, but that's really the kind of bicycle that the OP should be looking at: an all-day road bike with fender eyelets, clearance for 28-32mm tires and lively but stable geometry biased for road riding. These bikes are out there, don't get sucked into making a choice between the lesser of two evils when you can do much better.

Oh, and have some respect for the humble loaded touring bike! They don't ride like cows, really. They're lots of fun.