Surly cross check size???????

Google sponsored links

DanitoLaboy

Hello everyone,

Im about to buy a surly cross check frame and fork for commuting and LD riding. I've read alot of post on how this frame runs 1 size bigger (top tube) than your avg bike. I went a got a fitting done by my LBS and according to them i should purchase a frame in between 45.5-46.2 (yes im short 5'4" to be exact). Im currently riding a Cannondale CAAD8 50cm and its too big for me. to make a long story short im debating if i should go with the 42 frame or the 46. any advice? thanks for the help.

The BikeForums Team

-adv-

This is an archived thread, you can find the full version of this thread, with images, links and more content here.

Ready to buy? Check out these two online bike stores:
- http://www.nashbar.com (you can find the latest bike nashbar coupons in this thread)
- http://www.performancebike.com (you can find the latest performance bike coupons in this thread)

Cya on the forums,
- The BikeForums Team
- http://www.bikeforums.net

M_S

My general advice would be to er onj the side of a smaller frame. Standover may or may not be an issue, but regardless, I'vfe noticed that smaller sized x checks seem to have somewhat compact (sloping top tube) geometry.You may need a longish stem and post with some setback, but as you're building from the frame up, it shouldn't be an issue.Still though, 42 sounds small. Do they not offer a 44?

DanitoLaboy

scotch

it might be worth getting fitted at another shop to get a 2nd opinion.

my CC is a 58, along with my other two bikes, one of which is a bianchi axis with a compact frame. so for me the sizing was right on. i guess it comes down to variables like arm and leg length. either way, you'll love the CC. awesome bike.

DanitoLaboy

Thanks for reply.

socalrider

going from a 50 to a 42 is a huge leap.. I found that my crosscheck was perfect at 58cm.. My normal road bike size is 60cm.. If you go with the 46cm, it would be more like a stock 48cm road bike in sizing..

andychang

when you say "too big" are you referring to both your standover height as well as the length of the top tube? the surly CC's are in a unique boat as even the 42cm c-t seat tube comes with a 52.2 c-c effective top tube. the 46 c-t comes with a 52.88 effective top tube.

i believe that the cannondale you have runs 48c-t by 52.5 c-c eff top tube? if the bike is solely too "tall" for you then the 46cm might do the trick by giving you an extra (~)inch of clearance. if your current bike is currently too long and too tall, i would second the opinion of getting the 42cm and making adjustments based on that. i was in a similar bind as yourself with finding very few cyclocross frames that fit my shorter stature (longer torso compared to legs), and i ended up getting a redline conquest pro (44cm)

DanitoLaboy

Stand over is ok not perfect but ok. The Cannondale is simply too long for me. when i do my weekly LD ride halfway thru my back is in pain. plus i cant get fore and aft seat position right. My seat right now is all the way foward like a tri bike.

climbhoser

Seat forward isn't bad if you are still KOPS. I've got an 80mm stem, 75mm reach drops (Ritchey Biomax), and a Thomson no-setback-post with the seat all the way forward.

Right there I can do it. Any further and I start hating it, but with those improvements I can do it, and it's good if not a hair long. I'm still behind KOPS because I have a short femur, though.

All this as an example that you just have to figure out your body and where you're long, what you can get away with.

It's pretty simple, you're just trying to create a biomechanically advantageous position for cycling, and KOPS is a good start as is nose over bar and other measurements (LeMond elbow gauge, etc...).

Go nuts!

andychang

sorry to put other ideas in your head, but have you looked at the surly traveler's check or long haul trucker yet? if you are using the bike soley for commuting and long distance rides, it might be another option. the 46c-t comes with a 51.5 virtual top tube...

one con of the long haul trucker may be that the smaller sizes only take 26" wheels, but i believe that the travelers check takes all 700c on even the smaller frames.

i would be careful with a shorter stem. they can cause twitchy steering at lower speeds, though once you hit a comfortable commuting speed i'm sure it won't be that big of a deal.

climbhoser

i would be careful with a shorter stem. they can cause twitchy steering at lower speeds, though once you hit a comfortable commuting speed i'm sure it won't be that big of a deal.

I hear people say that all the time and wonder if they've ever tried it. I rode with a 50mm on my MTB for years. Granted, that's a different ride, but still...

I think 70 is on the small side, and 80 is ok, 90-110 being the most desireable.

But, it doesn't really do much in terms of handling unless it prevents you from weighting the front. However, typicall folks who need shorter stems aren't going to be unweighting the front due to a shorter stem, but weighting it properly. A couple cm won't really change the lever arm enough to make it "twitchy"

Because of my short torso and arms I frequently am stuck with shorter stems. Just don't go too short and you're fine.

andychang

yup, i'd say the same. 70 is pushing it, 80 is borderline, and 90 - 110 is optimal.

DanitoLaboy

thanks for all the replies. I compared the geometry guide on both bikes and the 46cm is almost identical to my current ride. So if i understand correctly i should go with the 42cm.The top tube is shorter on the 42 not by much but it is. LBS is not much help around here cause im not interested in their models. Im also nowhere near KOPS on my current ride.

M_S

So, perhaps just plan on a longish stem. What length are you using on your current ride?

Previous - Top - Next