LHT or crosscheck?
 

i gather the crosscheck is 5lbs lighter. but the surly long haul trucker has better parts.

which would you get?

I'm wondering the same thing.

What kind of riding will you be doing?

I would say LHT for longer rides, rougher roads, or if you have an interest in bike touring.

Crosscheck for quickness and speed.

I lOVE my CC for my short 10 mile round trip commute :)

Get the LHT if you've got a need to carry heavy loads distributed between front and rear panniers, and you want ultra-low gearing designed for hauling very heavy stuff over long mountain passes.

If you're not hauling tons of gear and don't plan on any fully loaded touring, then go with the X-Check. It's plenty durable for any kind of rough roads you'll put it on. (It's a CX bike fer crying out loud!) With minor adjustments from the stock setup on the X-Check Complete it's a very capable and comfortable long distance bike or commuter rig. Aside from the usual stem/post/saddle/bars question for general fit of the bike, the first thing I'd change on the stock setup (if you ride lots of hills and want the range) is put a 34t ring up front and a wider MTB cassette in back.

I'm not saying the LHT is a bad bike, just that if you're not planning on doing any touring it's not the best bike for the application.

Interesting timing... This is a question I've been pondering over the past couple of weeks also. I'm trying to pick a commuter bike that could do some touring also. I currently own two CF road bikes, one of which (Trek Pilot) I've commuted on a couple of times, but the bike is definately not made for the condition of our terribly bumpy and pot-holed city streets. My commute here in Honolulu is about 6 miles one way, through the most conjested part of the city.

The reason I keep coming back to the LHT is that I'd like to take the bike to the other islands for some light touring. The islands are pretty small, so the tours wouldn't last more than a couple of days - maybe a week at the most.

Also, for those in the know - a question on sizing of the CrossCheck and LHT. I'm exactly 6'0" and currently ride a 55cm Look 585 and a 58cm Trek Pilot. It seems that I would be deciding between a 56 and 58 Surly. Any advise here?

Not to be a pain, but I think the best frame Surly makes is the Pacer. It would make a good commuter, and isn't a tank when you just go for a ride.

If you don't mind carrying your stuff in a backpack or courier bag, since there's no rack brazes on the Pacer.
The Cross Check is only 0.5 pounds heavier for the frame and fork, has rack and fender brazes (in back; fender only up front), and clears much wider tires. (The Pacer can only take 32mm without and 28mm tires w/ fenders, so no studs in the winter.)

There's the LHT, then there's everything else trying to be as good. ;)

Again, I've got to question: As good at what?

The LHT and Cross Check are both excellent bikes, but I think it's essential to distinguish the type of riding you'll be doing before chosing a bike. The LHT is a fantastic touring frame, but I wouldn't want one on a congested city commute where I'd need a sharp turning radius and quick manouverability. The Cross Check is awesome as a commuter and distance bike (I have one), but with it's higher bottom bracket I wouldn't load the panniers on it as a long distance touring rig.
Either bike is going to work well for long distances, but if you're looking for a more aggressive position in the saddle and tighter handling from the bike, the Cross Check is the way to go. If you want a more relaxed position in the saddle and effortless straight-line tracking from the bike, then the LHT is a better choice.

More aggressive position? You could setup both bikes to have the same position.

Where are you getting the big differences in handling from? The difference varies between sizes, but in my size the head tube and seat tube angles are the same on both bikes. A couple cm on the chainstay isn't going to be that drastic.

It just sounds like you're speaking of theoretical differences between a touring and race bike more than the actual differences between these two frames.

it would be used for fun, commuting, and grocery getting.

and the pacer does have rack mounts. i wish they would start selling one as complete with veloce.

I went with the LHT myself, just got it on the road last week. I'm hoping to get into bike touring and I already do a lot of 10-15 mi. suburban rides for transportation besides my 6 mile (one way) commute, so I figured the bike designed to be comfortable on long road trips was the right choice for me.

my lht is like a land yacht. great on long rides, not so great for short fast rides. it depends on what you're looking for...i've got front and rear racks and bags. you get on an lht and you go 20 miles. it's the difference between an old cadillac and a new... well, i don't know. i don't have a cross check.

I'm waffling between the two bikes also. My use will be mostly commuting and grocery getting with some touring thrown in. I have a trailer so i think the CC will work for that, but was wondering if anyone ever put a LHT fork on a CC?

There's headtube length, too. But I also have a hard time picturing a traffic scenario where frame geometry is the limiting factor rather than my reflexes. Unless of course I got hamstrung by toe overlap from 700c wheels on a CC when my LHT has 26" wheels...

I wanted a bike I could ride FAT tires with fenders uphill pulling kid(s) on a trailer or trail-a-bike with a big load of groceries, no-hands. LHT it was.

No question about it, get the 56. The 56 has a 57 tt just like your Trek Pilot. The TT is LOOOOOOONG on the Xcheck....a problem I have yet to find a solution to.

The pacer has fender eyelets in the rear, but there's no upper mounts on the seat stays. You'll have to mount P-clips or get a Tubus adapter kit.

I'd like to see some build-up options from Surly that you could apply to any of their frames. I think it would be sweet if they offered a few different levels of equipment as a separate purchase package to go with their frames.

I wonder if what we're seeing is the exact limit of the economy of scale on non-frame parts.

FYI - The weight difference is mainly due to the heavy duty parts used on the LHT. There is little difference between the weight of the frames... the Surly LHT (56cm) frame + fork weighs 7.4lbs. The same size Crosscheck frame weighs 7.07 lbs.

Go for the Crosscheck if you want a slightly more aggressive feel, don't plan on running a front rack, and if you don't anticipate having problems with heel strike. The LHT is the bike to have for carrying heavy loads long distances. They're both great bikes... just great at different things.

OK, I was being facetious in post #9, but CliftonGK1, like Jeffs and others have said, it's not the frame geometry that will make the real difference in traffic, especially if you're differentiating between the LHT and Crosscheck!

FWIW I've stripped my LHT down to a bare bones 'road bike' configuration, thrown on the Ksyrium Elites with 23's, and comfortably hung with the lead group on 100+ mile road rides averaging over 20mph. The same bike with my commuter/tourer 36-spoke wheelset, 38's, full fenders, lights, front & rear racks and panniers, and I'm off for a long weekend camping/fishing trip. Somewhere in between is my commuting setup, which also sees me reconfig the bike season to season, and depending where I'm working at the time. I've done 60 mile r/t, 5 days per week commutes on my LHT, you could say that it's a daily 'tour' at that distance..... Once or twice a week I hook up the trail-a-bike plus the kiddiecarrier trailer behind that and take the kids out for a fun ride on the 'road train' :) , then there's the multitude of cargo trailers loaded with up to 300lb of all sorts of different things I've towed behind the LHT over the years. The 30 - 50lb of weekly grocery shopping is just routine now.... Try finding another bike as versatile, for the price. (I'm sure there are some, but not many)

Of the several dozen bikes I've owned through the years, and the 6 in my garage now (including my C'dale CAAD9 Optimo1 Dura-Ace, carbon upgrades, etc.) none feel as 'right' as my LHT. It's not as light/stiff/fast/nimble as the C'dale, but a helluva lot tougher. It's not as 'pure' as the fg, but infinitely more versatile, and not as robust as the mountain bike, but pretty darn close! (I used to take a singletrack short cut on my commute once). It's the one I'd keep if I could only ever have 1 bike. It's like an extension of my body. She's not the absolute best bike in every category, but she's the best in some and so close to the best in others that she's the most versatile by far.

One more thing to consider, do you ever think you might run an internal gear hub or single speed on the bike? It's possible to do both with the LHT, just a little more complicated because you need a chain tensioner or an eccentric bottom bracket, which ruins the aesthetic for some. If you want to run fixed at all, definitely get the Cross Check. BTW, I've got an LHT and love it.

So it sounds like the LHT is the do all bike? I had really been looking at the C-check as a do all with light touring being part of the all. Now I am confused..........as usual :)

Mr. Jim,

I think the Xcheck is a good do all bike. I think what you're seeing is that everyone's happy with what they decided to get.

I am VERY happy to have the Xcheck. I ride over 30 miles a day on my commute, do kiddie hauling, change it from geared to single speed for winter riding, and even doing some light tours. I have average feet, size 9, and I never have heel strike nor do I have toe overlap unless I use fenders.

The ONE thing I wish the Xcheck had, and it's still in no way a deal breaker, is lowrider braze ons on the fork for a little bit more "involved" touring. As it is I can still put a solid front rack on there and do a front rack bag, but I can't do panniers (that I've found, but I'm open to ideas) on the front. So, I do a front rack bafg, a handlebar bag, rear panniers and I stack the rear rack, and then do a frame bag and I'm set!

Good for at least a few nights, depending on how smelly I'm ok with getting and how much money I can accept spending on food instead of cooking it.

I like it because it's so zippy feeling, and because I like to race 'cross in the fall, and because I like making it a single speed for the winter as I abhor derailleur duty on a daily basis. The LHT is great, but it's more like a cruise ship where the Crosscheck is a cabin cruiser. The cruise ship is great, but it's a bit more slow feeling to me and not as nice if you want to do just pure road riding a lot with it. Light touring is my last priority, whereas commuting is #1 for me, and going on fun rides is #2.

I could go on forever, but you get the idea...try them both and decide which one feels better to ride and go from there. However, if loaded touring is #1 for you, then don't even question it and get the LHT.

When I mention the 'more aggressive position' on the Cross Check vs. the LHT, I'm talking about stock-off-the-lot setup, no part swapping. Sure, you can set either bike up to be just like the other since the frame angles and tube measurements are nearly the same, but when ordering a complete of either bike, the LHT is a more relaxed setup.
Between the LHT and the X-Check, there's not enough difference in the front ends (1mm of fork rake, IIRC) to feel a steering difference. The longer chainstays on the LHT do lead to a longer turning radius and a less nimble feel, IMO. Nothing like you'd feel with a 2 degree difference in HT angle, but if you ride both bike through the same situations you'll notice a difference. (Maybe. I notice it.)
If you're looking for a true "do it all" bike between the two, then the LHT is a better option. Off-the-rack it's ready for a wider option of riding than the X-Check. Now, you could always put an LHT fork on an X-Check and have the option for a front lowrider rack, but if you've got big panniers/big feet then you run the risk of heel strike with the shorter chainstays.

If it helps the OP or anyone with a decision, here's why I went with the X-Check vs. the LHT:
- I wanted a bike for MY commute, as well as long distance riding. My commute is 30 miles r/t with lots of hills and I drive once a week so I don't need to carry clothes, etc., just a lunch and repair kit. I use a handlebar bag and a seat wedge. I needed to clear 35mm studs with fenders for a couple months in the winter, and I run 28mm tires under the same fenders the rest of the year. I wanted a wide range cassette and a compact double instead of a triple up front.
The X-Check only needed me to swap out the tires/stem/saddle from stock parts for a perfect fit, and a 34t ring and 11-32 cassette to perfect the drivetrain. Fenders, and a front rack pilfered from my last bike, and it was ready to go.
I don't do overnight touring where I haul everything plus the kitchen sink, so I didn't want the extra weight of a triple, and I don't need the longer stays and lowrider mounts. I don't mind the tall stance of the BB on the X-Check since I'm 6'6"; every bike makes me feel like I'm perched up high anyhow. The extra inch doesn't affect my balance on long rides.