The Surly Thing

[canonsue]

Hi,
I am wanting to buy the Surly Crosscheck. I know that there are several members here with one. Buying one is no problem, but trying one is becoming very difficult. So here is my question to all of you crosscheck ladies. Before, I have a LBS order one, and even then, I know that I will need to ride it to see if it will work for me, I want to check it out with all of you about what size I will probably need. I am 5'3" with about equal petite proportions (other than carrying about 35 pounds more than I would like and that I plan to unload in the upcoming months).

Yesterday, I looked at a Specialized Tricross 49cm which is close to the Crosscheck 46cm. It could work, but it still seemed like it might be a bit big. Yes, I could flat foot (but not much clearance), but it seemed like the reach may have been more than I would want.

So that leads me to believe that perhaps, I need to try out both the crosscheck 42cm and 46cm. Does anyone ride either of these sizes and would you be willing to share your stats (so to speak) and experience?

Thanks,

-Sue

(One more thing: I am in the Denver area, so if any of you Crosscheck ladies are in the area and are willing for me to take a look at your bike, that would be more than appreciated.)

[wildeny]

Hello, Sue, I never ride a Surly but I'm about the same height as you so I just speak from my experience of picking a bike.

Short answer: pick up Surly 42 cm

Long answer: Look at the effective top tube length and the stand over height. These two are the limiting parameters for petite women to pick up a road bike. :o

Surly 42cm has a TT (Effec.) 522mm, which is already in the long side and even longer than Specialized 49 cm (vs 515mm -- this one is OK).
As for the stand over height, it should be equal or less than your inseam measured without shoes on (which will be your margin).

I estimated that your inseam is about 727 mm (by this formula "height/2/1.1" for normal people), while SO height is 732 mm in Surly 42cm and 748 mm in Specialized 49cm. I'm not sure about whether you wore the shoes or not when testing Specialized.

I wouldn't choose either if it's higher than my inseam. That's why I chose Fuji Finest RC XS instead of Fuji Roubaix Pro 49cm. With my shoes on, I have few cm for clearance on Finest RC XS (however I'd prefer shorter top tube length, say 500mm instead of 515mm).

[PscyclePath]

Sue:

The Cross-Check is a 'cross bike frame, which means the bottom bracket is a little higher than your typical road bike. So, as a rule of thumb you want one frame size smaller than you would typically try on a road bike; if you routinely ride a 48 cm road bike, try a 46 cm in most of the 'cross bike frames.

Tom

[Cataboo]

Canon,

Reach can be adjusted somewhat with the length of your stem.

What do you currently ride and how upright do you want to be?

I don't have a cross check, I'm 5'1, definitely not longer legs, proportionate torso & arms. I do have a 42 cm surly pacer. I really would prefer to have a longer top tube than the one that's on the surly, but it's okay, I just have a setback seatpost on it & a long stem on it. I've prefer a much different seat angle than the 75 that's on the 42 cm pacer. It's just my commuting bike, so it's set up well enough that I'm okay on it.

My road bikes have about a 46-47 cm seat tube to the top (my seat's usually at 50-51 cms), and have about a 540mm top tube, with me sitting fairly upright, so I don't think the reach is a problem on the 46 cm cross check, and the 75 degree seat angle on the 42 cm makes me think that I really wouldn't want it.

[canonsue]

Surly 42cm has a TT (Effec.) 522mm, which is already in the long side and even longer than Specialized 49 cm (vs 515mm -- this one is OK).

weildeny,
I see that Specialize gives 515mm as TT, but I don't see anything about a TT (effec) like the Surly. I just assumed that it would also be about 10-12mm additional.

But your point is well taken.

-Sue

[Andrea]

I think the smaller size might be better for you- I'm 5'6," normally ride a 54cm road bike (I've got ~30inch inseam), and went with a 46cm crosscheck because the standover on the 50cm was going to be close to being too high. It fits me perfectly w/a 120mm stem that's got a slight rise to it.

[ginny]

Hi, I have a Surly LHT. I rode the crosscheck first too (I only got the LHT because there were 2008 models left...). Anyway, I am 5'6" and I have a short torso. My road bike is a Bianchi Eros Donna 50 cm. My Surly is ... 47cm!!! It seemed SO small to order that size, but I have to be honest, it is still more of a reach than the Bianchi! So, I would definitely try the 42 if I were you. Lee's sells surly's, and maybe you could get lucky and find a little one in stock somewhere...

Yea! Surlys!

[SadieKate]

Sue:

The Cross-Check is a 'cross bike frame, which means the bottom bracket is a little higher than your typical road bike. So, as a rule of thumb you want one frame size smaller than you would typically try on a road bike; if you routinely ride a 48 cm road bike, try a 46 cm in most of the 'cross bike frames.

Tom

What does BB height have to do with top tube length? I have a Kelly Knobby X and a Kelly Bonestock, both have the same size top tube. A size smaller and I'd have to use a wicked long stem and screw up the front/back weight balance.

[uforgot]

It's because the size is deceptive. I had a 53cm Burley frame and it matches the 46cm Surly frame almost exactly. You really need to look at the geometry. I'm riding a 46cm Surly and normally I would not go below 50cm. The tt length on the 46cm is 528.8mm. Pretty long for a 46cm bike. Look at the top tube length.

[SadieKate]

So, the bottom bracket vs size thing really is specific to the brand and model, not the class of cyclocross frames.

Just another reason not to look at size labels, but the actual measurements.

[canonsue]

This discussion is so incredibly helpful.

Looking forward to hearing from other "Surly" women in this discussion.

-Sue

[uforgot]

So, the bottom bracket vs size thing really is specific to the brand and model, not the class of cyclocross frames.

Just another reason not to look at size labels, but the actual measurements.

I had to order mine and I immediately said I needed a 50cm. Then I looked at the geometry table, compared to my Burley which fit and changed my mind. I had to think about it, as I couldn't imagine needing less than 50, but my lbs said "The numbers don't lie, forget the "size" thing. Also, on the Surly forum there is always a lot of discussion about how some people get them too big.

[canonsue]

Lee's sells surly's, and maybe you could get lucky and find a little one in stock somewhere...
Yea! Surlys!

Ginny,
Thanks for the tip. I just got off of the phone with someone from Lee's. The guy was very helpful, but unfortunately no go with even a 46cm in stock. There are a few more bike shops that sell and customize Surlys, so I will keep calling to see if I can find one of either size to try.

Thanks,

-Sue

[Miranda]

So, the bottom bracket vs size thing really is specific to the brand and model, not the class of cyclocross frames.

Just another reason not to look at size labels, but the actual measurements.

I'm sure someone will come along and correct this notion in my head that I *think* I recall reading somewhere if not right. But...

I believe one reason the bottom bracket is higher up is to be able to clear obstacles. I don't own a cyclecross bike. But it's on my list for the stable. I do own a hardtrail mtb in addition to a roadie girl.

When your terrain such as trail riding is over boulders and fallen trees etc., the lower bottom bracket would be also lower to crash into something. Versus higher like the mtb keeping pedals level with an ump rides right over the tree.

Think of it in terms of a fancy sports car that is very low to the groud, vs a truck that is higher off the ground... one clears stuff easy, one does not.

[SadieKate]

I'm sure someone will come along and correct this notion in my head that I *think* I recall reading somewhere if not right. But...

I believe one reason the bottom bracket is higher up is to be able to clear obstacles. I don't own a cyclecross bike. But it's on my list for the stable. I do own a hardtrail mtb in addition to a roadie girl.

When your terrain such as trail riding is over boulders and fallen trees etc., the lower bottom bracket would be also lower to crash into something. Versus higher like the mtb keeping pedals level with an ump rides right over the tree.

Think of it in terms of a fancy sports car that is very low to the groud, vs a truck that is higher off the ground... one clears stuff easy, one does not.
Um, are you telling me this or who? I know the BB height on a cross bike is higher. I was wondering what the BB height has to do with the top tube length, not the seat tube length, on a cyclocross bike. And I was right - nothing. At least no more than any good bike builder would plan out when designing any bike - road, mtb, or whatever. You still need to pick a bike frame "size" by actual measurements, not by the decal stuck on the bike.

If you read my previous post, you'd see I have a road bike and a cross bike from the same builder in the same size with the same top tube length. But Surly doesn't design this way. Therefore, PscyclePath's comment about a smaller size only applies to Surly and bikes from builders who design similarly - not to all cross bikes.

[canonsue]

Also, on the Surly forum there is always a lot of discussion about how some people get them too big.

I have searched but I have never found that forum. Can you post a link? (If that is allowed in this forum) Or give me some direction on where that forum is?

-Sue

[Miranda]

Um, are you telling me this or who? I know the BB height on a cross bike is higher. I was wondering what the BB height has to do with the top tube length, not the seat tube length, on a cyclocross bike. And I was right - nothing. At least no more than any good bike builder would plan out when designing any bike - road, mtb, or whatever. You still need to pick a bike frame "size" by actual measurements, not by the decal stuck on the bike.

If you read my previous post, you'd see I have a road bike and a cross bike from the same builder in the same size with the same top tube length. But Surly doesn't design this way. Therefore, PscyclePath's comment about a smaller size only applies to Surly and bikes from builders who design similarly - not to all cross bikes.

Oh my, no!:( Sorry if that came out of whack:o:).

I've looked at the Surley's before. Wishing it would fit me. And I know even in the smallest size, the TT is too long in design.

I was just thinking about what a challenge it is to find smaller bikes stock that actually fit right. Before I found your post, I was coming back to post this thread link.

Some helpful discussion to the OP on geometry from the cyclecross section of this board....
http://forums.teamestrogen.com/showthread.php?t=27134

EDIT
This is a good thread too...
http://forums.teamestrogen.com/showthread.php?t=28565

[Miranda]

More $ than a Surly, but she sure is pretty...
http://www.lunacycles.com/store.html
(and lord help me, pretty much fits me--about same as my mtb--and erie *same* color--twins in the stable, hmm--dunno about that--but for the sale price:rolleyes:... ahh, I digress:p)

And then, there is...(mo $ too than Surly *sigh*)...
http://www.terrybicycles.com/cycling_savvy/valcross

Kinda interesting blog on cross and smallness...
http://www.kerry-litka.com/main/wordpress/2008/10/page/3/

[wildeny]

I see that Specialize gives 515mm as TT, but I don't see anything about a TT (effec) like the Surly. I just assumed that it would also be about 10-12mm additional.

It is possible that Specialized bike has the horizontal top tube. Then its effective TT is the same as TT. (from what I see, it looks like that).

[uforgot]

I have searched but I have never found that forum. Can you post a link? (If that is allowed in this forum) Or give me some direction on where that forum is?

-Sue

Here ya go.

http://groups.google.com/group/SurlyLHT

[canonsue]

Well, I did the Surly thing but purchased the Long Haul Trucker (42cm) instead of the Crosscheck. I wanted a bike that I could ride on dirt roads and flat single track as well as pavement. This bike will do that. And for a short woman, it looks like the fit will be much more comfortable. I am not crazy about the smaller 26" wheels but it does make the smaller bikes a much better fit and more stable.

Thanks everyone for the help. I will introduce myself in the introduce yourself thread and stay around awhile.

-Sue

[wildeny]

I think that's a good choice. Look forward to seeing your new bike. :)