-
The point was why are they so low, which they aren't, maybe the headtubes could be slightly longer, but to cater for the slammed wanna be racer brigade and the fookin ell I'm over 40 and my back aches brigade, spacers give you the choice (like the height adjustment on a quill stem).
If you don't race why would you want to be folded in half, having to strain your neck muscles to look at the view, I'll go more upright even if it involves a few spacers.
jontea-
The point was why are they so low, which they aren't.
Fair point, what people haven't realised with Surly's Stack and Reach that it does not included the headset*, which add around a centimetre (Chris King headset stack is 33.95mm).
This is where Surly's sizing is consistent funnily enough, the Stack correspondent with the seat tube length (56cm Cross-Check have a Stack of 556.5mm).
Add a headset, the Stack will be over 560mm.
*To be absolutely fair, a lots of manufacturer don't included headset stack either
-
The point was why are they so low, which they aren't.
Moreso, while the Stack of the Surly is consistent, because of the top tube length being irregular to says the least, this mean people end up sizing down and required more headset spacer, which in itself as you said, not a bad thing, but if you add a full carbon fork, there is a limit on how high you can set the steerer too (Specialized Tarmac for instance have a maximum stack of 40mm)
edscoble
The issues less to do with spacer, but the ridiculous sizing.
For instance, their 50cm Cross-Check is longer than a typical 54cm bicycle.
A Genesis Croix de Fer in XS is actually shorter and taller than the smallest 42cm Cross-Check.
Moreso, a 54cm Cross-Check is longer than a 56cm Cross-Check.
Surly kept the old geometry because it work for them for the last couple of decades, but that was before Stack and Reach exist which show how poorly sized they are.