I have an eye toward building a commuter/grocery-getter from one of these frames. Similar in their features, with eyelets I'd need for a rear rack and possibly fenders, and both have vertical dropouts. The ES has a shorter wheelbase and steeper seat tube, while the Double Cross has a notably longer top tube and 4mm (66 vs 70) less BB drop.

Opinions? The bike won't be doubling as a tourer. I'll probably put some kind of flat bar on it and build it up with 1x7 or possibly 2x7 gearing.

If you want to go touring, build it up as a longtail Xtracycle. That way it will do double duty. You can use it for commuting/hauling groceries and still have the option to go touring when you want.

I don't even know what that means. Does it have anything to do with my question?

I'd get the soma doublecross. It can fit fatter tires which will be useful in a flat bar set up with racks. I love my soma doublecross and it makes a great all rounder:

So what did happen to decision science studies?

Yup. Its a trailer frame kit that converts a regular bike into a cargo bike.

It comes with two huge bags you can haul a week's groceries home.

Would that be due purely to the brakes? The ES uses 57mm reach brakes and reportedly will handle fenders and some 32mm tires. The chainstay length is 420mm on the ES vs. 425mm on the Double Cross.

Just be a man and go 1x1 (cheaper and less maintenance that way.)

I'd like to know the answer this question.

I like fresh bread/cheese/milk/veg/meat daily, why would I shop for a week at once?

Might be fine if there no hills or freeway overpasses near the OP.

And if he decides to go touring, single speed limits his options.

Double Cross would theoretically make for a better grocery getter because it was their touring rig before they made the Saga.

(S)he did state it's no a touring bike? Or did I make a mistake?

Which particular specifications make this true? Let's help the OP decide based on factual evidence.

Its an all-arounder. Why should OP feel limited? Maybe someday do that, not just now.

There is clearly more room around the brakes. The other limit are the chainstays and there is probably a bit more room there as well since the double cross can fit fatter tires.

I was just curious if we were speculating or actually comparing geometries. Seems like we're speculating, which is cool.

Just deciding if we listen to the OP or tell them when we want instead of what they're asking.

You're kidding right? I actually own the bike and I have a pretty good idea of what the clearance is like for a bike spec'd for a standard or long reach brake. The Soma double cross can handle a 38c with fenders. The Soma ES cannot.

Or you could just take a look at the specs.

Double Cross | SOMA Fabrications

ES | SOMA Fabrications

Or you can speculate as to what other people may or may not know which is apparently what you do; that's cool too.

I don't take internet people at their word as I can't verbally probe to see if they're talking crap. I always assume what people know or don't know, otherwise how can I gauge whether they're operating within their realm of knowledge. You could've just posted the specs from the beginning.

actually: those specs are quite similar.

You're just arguing for argument's sake. Or you simply don't know what you're talking about. Probably both from your posts that I have read.

I own both bikes as well.

I've found that certain brands of tires are wider and won't clear the brakes. Certain 38s will fit both bikes, others won't.

What tires do you use on the Double Cross for commuting?

Gatorskins.

Seriously?

You own both bikes? You have 8 responses so far in this thread. ... And haven't posted a single word of advice that is even remotely useful.

I also meant what width? I was thinking I'd probably be running 32mm, possibly 28mm.