# Surly Cross Check or LHT?



## richmotion (May 18, 2010)

First: Glad to be into this community!

I know, almost everything has been said about those two Surly´s.

But:

1) I think Size 50-52 will fit me best, that means 26-wheels on the LHT vs. 700C on the CC. I would prefer the CC here.

2) The LHT was made for fully loaded touring, does that mean the ride is much stiffer than the CC´s? I weigh about 170 pounds, for commuting I won´t be carrying much more than 10 to 20 pounds extra. Does the CC offer much more comfort here?

3) "off-road": Get me right: light trails, gravel roads. Everything that comes up on a ride on unknown backroads. Does the LHT the job as good as the CC? 

4) Tire clearance: Which of these two Surlys has more room for wide tires? 

5) The LHT´s fork would fit almost perfect on the CC, at least the difference made to the geometry would hardly be recognizeable, I guess. Is the LHT-fork capable of "cyclocross", meaning can it withstand the same forces? I would prefer the LHT fork mainly because of the midblade mounts... 

Thanks for your replies!

Richard


----------



## jmadams13 (Sep 28, 2008)

I have a LHT fork on my CC. Geo difference was only slightly noticeable. Handles off road great, touring is fine, and even makes decent road bike for randos and group rides. I can fit 45c tiers fine for off road, but normally run 40's. The LHT fork can handle everything the CC fork can. IMO, the CC frame is a tad more versatile then the LHT because of the dropouts, but the shorter wheelbase can be a pain during longer tours or with a heavier load. and IMO, the new LHT blue is ugly.



















I have done a few tours one and off road, with loads from a credit card tour, to a full load, with a trailer. The CC geo results in a snappier ride, as the LHT is more relaxed. But it was doable. The only places I regretted it were on long smooth descents, where the longer wheelbase would have been a nice addition. The CC would be my choice again if I was do buy a new bike all over again. I ended up with the LHT fork after a warranty snafu, but thats a different story. I was actually glad when I received the LHT fork, and would defiantly do it again. The loss of a few mm in A-C is not that big of a deal to me, and the bike still handles in "cross" mode just as well, if not a little better IMO.


----------



## Squash (Jul 20, 2003)

1) I think Size 50-52 will fit me best, that means 26-wheels on the LHT vs. 700C on the CC. I would prefer the CC here.

Can't help there, but very true. If you must have a 700c wheel that pretty much leaves the Trucker out of the picture.

2) The LHT was made for fully loaded touring, does that mean the ride is much stiffer than the CC´s? I weigh about 170 pounds, for commuting I won´t be carrying much more than 10 to 20 pounds extra. Does the CC offer much more comfort here?

Not really. I find the LHT ride a bit more compiant than the CC, loaded or unloaded. Don't know how Surly does it, but likely has to do with tube manipulation. One of the reasons that you don't find disc tabs on the LHT is the ride. They feel they'd have to stiffen the rear too much and they'd loose that LHT ride feel. Which is very likely true.

3) "off-road": Get me right: light trails, gravel roads. Everything that comes up on a ride on unknown backroads. Does the LHT the job as good as the CC? 

Yes and no. The LHT doesn't handle as smartly as the CC due to it's low center of gravity and longer wheel base. Both traits that make it one of the more outstanding touring frames. But the LHT is very stable whether loaded or not. The CC would have the edge here. But as far as being able to handle the stress etc., neither would have a problem.

4) Tire clearance: Which of these two Surlys has more room for wide tires?

The LHT with 26" wheels will take a 2.1 tire with or without fenders, the CC will take a 45c tire with or without fenders. A 2.1 tire works out to a 53c. So the LHT 26" will take a wider tire.

5) The LHT´s fork would fit almost perfect on the CC, at least the difference made to the geometry would hardly be recognizeable, I guess. Is the LHT-fork capable of "cyclocross", meaning can it withstand the same forces? I would prefer the LHT fork mainly because of the midblade mounts... 

Not a problem. We have several customers at the shop that have gone this route with their CCs. The fork fits fine, and the reports are that there is very little noticeable change in handling or ride. We've even had a couple of folks go in for fully loaded tours on their CCs with LHT forks. They reported to us that they worked great, but were deffinately a little less stable when fully loaded. Which is to be expected out of a cyclo cross geometry. A little more twitchy at speed is how one fellow put it. He did mention that the bike did let you know when you were pushing it too hard, and in plenty of time to avert disaster.

So your call on this one. The CC is deffinately a more versitile bike, and with your loads not exceeding 10 or 20lbs would be a good choice. The LHT would be a good choice also if there is the real possibility of fully loaded touring in your future. But the CC will do that to if configured properly. Just not as well as the LHT IMHO. My personal choice for commuting would be the CC. More versatility, snappier handling etc. It just depends on what you're likely to do the most of. :thumbsup: 

Good Dirt


----------



## PscyclePath (Aug 29, 2007)

What Squash said...

I have both bikes with a lot of miles on them... Started with a 54cm Cross-Check, and then replaced the Cross-Check with a 56cm, 700C Trucker last March after a drunk driver murdered my Cross-Check.

The CC uses pretty much standard road bike geometry, and has a higher bottom bracket for off-road clearance. It feels very much like your standard road bike... very peppy, a little more manueverable in tight places, maybe a little faster to accelerate. CC's don't have braze-ons for a front rack mount, though I used a rear cargo rack on mine, and did a good bit of loaded touring, commuting, and utility riding with it. I was very pleased with it, and would go out and buy another one today.

The Trucker is different. It is a touring frame, with a lower center of gravity, longer wheelbase, and a bigger, stiffer top tube, so it is a much more "plush" ride. Not as twitchy as the CC, but it does handle loads much better, and is much more stable. One big difference is the gearing: The standard setup on the Cross-Check is a compact double with a 40-inch granny gear; the Trucker gives a triple chainring set and a low gear of a hair less than 21 inches... after coming off the CC, you may feel like you can climb a brick wall with the Trucker, since the granny gear cog back there (34T) is bigger than many folks' small chainring ;-)

If you're looking for something that feels a lot like your road bike for club rides and cyclocross, and light(er) loaded commuting, the Cross-Check is a good deal. If you're into a smoother ride and need to really haul the freight, the Trucker should win that choice.


----------



## Thor29 (May 12, 2005)

I've had both and the Crosscheck is much more fun as a commuter due to the quicker handling. The LHT is awesome when fully loaded, but without a load it just seems like a slug.


----------



## richmotion (May 18, 2010)

Thank you for your advice!

I opened the same thread in the "Surly"-section, since no other company is on my list (except the Salsa Fargo, but that´s another story), and I thought I would get more detailed response there.

I am still uncertain because I don´t know what the future brings, and if I would use it for heavy shopping tours or not. Thanks again for your postings!


----------

