cyclezealot

It's a very stable bike for commuting. Weight I sometimes put on it, it's 26 pounds is not bad. Since it is not my main bike- I have no regrets. I saved a lot of money by swapping parts from my worn out Scott 520. Certainly more of a commuter bike than the Scott was.

chuckfox

I had seen a number of Cross-Checks that were built up, not the standard Surly set up, and each was different. I really liked the versatility of the frame. For example, I am currently running gears, but if I want to change it to single speed or even fixed it's no problem with the horizontal drop outs. It has great clearance for fenders, and it accepts cantilever brakes...another big plus if you plan to have fenders. It will also accommodate a wide range of tire widths.

Normally, I'm pretty skeptical of a one size-fits-all type of product, but this frame has tremendous versatility and still maintains a very nice level of quality. It's a very practically designed frame. I'm also a big fan of steel...and it rides very well. I could go on and on, let's just say I'd been a fan of the Cross-Check for about 3 years and when I finally got one it exceeded my expectations.

Mr_Finster

Chose Surly Cross-Check because I liked the versatility. Bought frame/fork through LBS for decent price ($380 after team discount plus tax). Had all of the components except for threadless headset and stem. Right now, running 105 9spd. Looking at building up a fixed gear rear wheel (surly single speed hub). I'll have to see how the funding goes. I have been riding this one for a year now and absolutely love it!!! I even use this for foul-weather riding and early morning rides since I hate to transfer the head-light. Makes the Merlin feel even lighter when I ride that on the weekends! I would estimate that with battery, rack and fenders, its around 25-27. Have not put it on the scale yet.

Before that, it was a Trek 1200 (circa 1995) with the rack clamped to the seat-stays. After three to four years of this, noticed that the rack/clamp attachment was digging into the drop-outs and frame. Yuck.

Picture available at the following link:
https://www.bikeforums.net/attachment...achmentid=5144

Emerson

I appreciate the suggestion, but I've spoken to a number of docs. I have degenerative disc disease, and the disc herniation I had that required emergency surgery was extremely severe. I have to be really gentle with what's left down there. I have hopes/fantasies that in 10-15 years I'll go in and have disc replacement surgery (they're just starting to do it here) and then be stronger. We'll see. For now, I simply have to be pretty careful.

SteelCommuter

First of all, congrats on not letting that stop you from doing what you want to do.

People have recommended many excellent frames. The Surly is an excellent frame, and you're right - a pound doesn't really make much of a difference. In my opinion, the reason people say it's heavy is a knee jerk defensive mechanism, like an apology for liking something unconventional (a bike that doesn't make light weight its guiding design goal), OR because "heavy" is the only criticism they could anticipate. Lighter frames are cool, but generally cost more, and often they are not as versatile. Often, not always.

I have a bike that weighs just as much as the Surly, and it is my favorite bike ever. Everyone I know with the Crosscheck loves it. A Soma would also be nice, I'm sure, but it just doesn't make much of a difference.

Your components for a commuting bike will make a bigger difference in the weight than frame choices.

Good riding!

Emerson

Thanks for the thoughtful response. I am getting the impression that the Surly will be just fine and, in the final analysis, only a pound or so heavier than the other frames. I can make some of that up in better wheels and other components as you say.

As to not letting it stop me--that is a constant battle. It's been about a year and a half since the injury that left me partially paralyzed on the left side and had me in emergency surgery at 35. I recovered physically better than the docs thought I might, but the fear is much harder to get over. I missed a curb hop yesterday and did a very slow, semi-controlled fall, but it still spooked me. A bad crash could leave me pretty messed up. I just found out a month or so ago that I need another surgery, this time on my neck. Deep sigh.

I'm trying to make the choice to simply live and do what I can do. My wife and I are planning a bike tour in the spring--maybe the Netherland or Ireland. I have no idea how my back will hold up, but I want to try. I've actually been quite inspired by reading the forums here; I see a lot of people who have had injuries, including to the back, and they get better and keep riding.

Thanks again.

cajonezzz

I love my Cross check.... all frakensteined together. It's my commuter, tourer all around transportation.
I think fully dressed out with Fenders, bottle, battery, tool bag pump, goo toobs it's weighing in at 30 ish.

I don't really think too much about the weight, and I love the utilitarian aspect of this frameset.

here it is after first being assembled.

cajonezzz

I love my Cross check.... all frakensteined together. It's my commuter, tourer all around transportation.
I think fully dressed out with Fenders, bottle, battery, tool bag pump, goo toobs it's weighing in at 30 ish.

I don't really think too much about the weight, and I love the utilitarian aspect of this frameset.

here it is after first being assembled.

Mr_Finster

Just checked and it is 27.5 pounds without paniers (as is in the pictutre in the link posted).

Daily Commute

I'm a Cross-Check fan. The only other bike on your list that I can discuss is the Gunnar because I saw one in my LBS. The Gunnar would make a better racing bike than the Cross-Check, but you couldn't fit fat tires and fenders on it. I don't remember if it had braze-ons for a rack.

And you can easily keep a Cross Check under 35 lbs.

chuckfox

Emerson, I admire you for perservering with your injuries and pray that you recover fully with time and hopefully not too much surgery...and I thank you for this post. I hope the information has been helpful for you, and it's been great to see these beautiful Cross-Check builds! What great setups Mr. Finster and cajonezzz have. It should give you some idea of how versitile this frame is.

late

Hi,
I am middle aged with hip and back issues. I have a cross frame sitting in the cellar. IMHO! you don't want a cross frame. If you go with Surly get a Pacer, or a LHT if you want to tour.

The Burly light tourer is a great choice. It's new, but the other Burly bikes I have seen are excellent values. I have a Gunnar Sport, which is also good, but more expensive.

Daily Commute

Why do you say this?

I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm curious as to why the Pacer or LHT would work better for a cyclist with back problems.

SteelCommuter

If you're going to give advice, particularly in the face of strong reviews for the Cross check and other bikes, you should say WHY. Cross frames can be very different from each other, and your cellar frame may be nothing like the Cross check.

Emerson

Thanks for your input. I would like, as others have suggested, to hear some of your reasoning. I have wondered if a cross bike is right. My reasons for wanting one include:

1. I wanted the most versatile bike possible within reason--unlike some folks here I doubt I will ever have a whole stable of bikes each for a different purpose, I don't have the money or the space. I want one bike to commute on no matter the weather, take on bike trails/fire roads, do some light touring, and run errands on. I originally fell in love with the Rivendell Atlantis, but it is too expensive and even heavier I think than the Surly will be.

2. Cross bikes seem to have less agressive geometry than regular road bikes--I thought this would make it easier to get the more upright position I need.

3. I'm around 200lbs and not overly delicate with gear, I wanted something I wouldn't have to baby.

4. The bike I'm currently on is a Specialized hybrid. It's been a good bike but it weighs 35+ lbs without rack, fenders, lights, etc. Way too heavy, not only for my back, but just for not having to move 10+ extra lbs of bike weight. I though a cross bike would be most like a hybrid but lighter and faster. I like having wider tires-they feel more stable and safer and more year-round appropriate.

5. I want to do some light off-road and light touring, it was my impression a cross would do each adequately, not as well as a mtn bike or a dedicated tourer, but well enough.

6. I think cross bikes are cool

On the down side, a cross bike is heavier than a dedicated road bike--though not most touring bikes. The shorter chainstays and wheelbase, and the higher bottom bracket of a cross make it less stable and perhaps less comfortable than a touring bike and might make it harder to use panniers (I've got big feet and I might be whacking my heels. (solution=three words--Carradice SQR Tour ))

I don't know enough about how geometry affects ride. I've only ridden a few cross bikes and for short test rides. I'm open to hearing folks with more experience offer comparisons. I'm also very open to someone convincing me I need to reconsider my choice. Thanks again.

chuckfox

In terms of versatility and toughness it's hard to beat the Surly Cross-Check. It certainly works well for me as a commuter and I plan to use it as a touring bike as well, although I haven't done that yet. I have not used panniers...I pull a Bob trailer instead, so I can't comment on how it behaves loaded or how much space there would be for your feet with panniers.

SteelCommuter

The weight of an Atlantis, a LHT, and the Cross Check are nearly identical, differing by mere grams. Even though the Atlantis has four custom multi-butted tubesets and the others 4130 chromoly, they all more or less weigh the same, and probably feel just as nice riding.

When you mention $1500, is that for everything, and what is everything?

The Gunnar cross hairs, which I used to have, is great and has a low BB. It is not meant to carry as much loaded weight as these other bikes, as well. They say on the website around 25 pounds, perhaps because it is 853 and the tubing isn't designed for loads. I wouldn't really doubt your decision for a cross bike. In many cases, they are very close to standard road bikes but with more clearance and braze-ons, more utility, and not really meant for cross racing at all (don't need those eyelets for that). Sometimes, I think it's how versatile road bikes became popular again - by badging them cross bikes.

Geometry issues are hotly debated, usually without any testing or scientific rigor. I have been more than impressed with how some people write about geometry, including contributors to Jan Heine's Vintage Bicycle Quarterly and the magazine Asphalt.

I'll say one more thing, and stop hogging space. No one I know has been disappointed in their Cross Check, Cross Hairs, Volpes, Atlantis, LHT, or Poprad. Those frames are proven designs. If I were concerned about which things are better, I'd worry more about tires and other equipment. And getting a SON generator hub

late

Hi,
it's not the back, but the hips. It's hard to describe, but the high bottom bracket puts your hips at a funny angle. When I was younger I rode that way on a Mtn bike for a decade with no problems. But I don't now. We had another middle aged guy here
with the same frame I was using at the time. He wound up with real problems and
I don't think he's riding now.

You might never experience the problem. But having gone done that road, that is my 2 cents. Here's Grant Peterson on the subject.

https://www.rivendellbicycles.com/html/rr_stilstep.html

michaelnel

My Soma Doublecross frame is supposedly a little lighter than the Crosscheck. But by the time I have it in full-up commuting guise, it's about 35lbs. The frame doesn't account for much of that. I have very stout touring wheels, very heavy Schwalbe Marathon Plus tires, rack, fenders, lights, Brooks saddle, etc... The difference in the weights of the two frames is lost in the noise.

Emerson

I mean $1500 buys me the frame, wheels, and all components and I am out the door, riding my new bike away. Even that is a bit more than I would like to spend. My general sense is that a Surly with pretty nice components will run around $1300, a Gunnar closer to $2000, and an Atlantis $2500+

Emerson

This is what I'm afraid of. I spend the money and by the time it is all set up I'm right back where I started with a bike just as heavy as my current 36 lb hybrid which I can't lift on my own. Aargh!

bbattle

Do you have to put the bike up on the roof? Is it possible to add a hitch to your car then put a bike rack on that? I bought a Hidden Hitch hitch mount and it took me about 10 min. to open the box and install it on my Element. I got a rack from Performance and I only have to lift the bike up two feet instead of over my head. Plus, with the roof rack, you have to hold that weight further away from your body.

Emerson

This is for a rear mount rack--unfortunately any lifting is tricky stuff, even if it is only a couple of feet. Thanks though. I think I need to focus on getting the bike lighter, rather than other solutions.

michaelnel

Well, that weight was with a Carradice bag with all my commuting stuff in it and a full water bottle, so the bike weight is less than that, but still probably in the high 20s.

Emerson

That sounds more manageable. I'm thinking of skipping the rack saving a pound or so, and just going with a Carradice. How do you like yours?

I also would take off the water bottles, and maybe even pop off the seat & post saving a bit more. If I can get to around 24-25 it should be fine. Obviously I don't need to lift the bike everyday. I just want to get it to the weight where I can pop off a couple of items and get it on my car by myself or for that matter onto the bus rack if the weather is really, really ugly.