Well, let me say that my garage currently houses these bikes (plus a couple others):




So, I might have a bit of a bias.

That said, I would have gotten the 2013 Jake regardless, because it's exactly what I've been looking for for years. I decided to sell the Cross Check instead of the 2008 Jake in part because I have more sentimental attachment to the Jake, but also in part because I like the 2008 Jake better than I liked the Cross Check. My 2008 Jake is a 52cm and is actually a bit small. My 2008 Major Jake is a 54cm and fits me like a glove. My 2013 Jake is a 53cm and fits exactly like the 54cm Major Jake. My Cross Check was a 54cm and was, to my tastes, too long in the top tube and too short in the head tube -- meaning it was simultaneously too small and too big by my standards. In reality, it probably fit me pretty well according to its intended design. That just turned out not to be the geometry I wanted.

The Cross Check fits more like a road racing bike, I think. The proportion of its head tube to its top tube means that it is built for an agressive riding position, low and stretched out. If you want that, then it's probably a better choice than the Jake. The Jake geometry is more compact and upright, but moderately so. The new Kona Rove is even more upright, kind of like the Salsa Vaya. It's all a matter of what you're looking for. For the way a bike fits, stack and reach (which roughly describe the relative position of the pedals and bars) are a good numerical indicator. The 54cm Cross Check has a stack height of 539mm and a reach of 395mm. The 53cm Jake, by comparison, has a stack height of 558mm and a reach of 385mm. The proportions are just different, by design. Of course, you can change that somewhat with tall spacer stacks and sloping stems, but then the geometry of the bike is working against you.

Anyway, I actually did like the Cross Check. It was just my least favorite of the bikes that I had that would be worth selling.