Functional bikes. Not Porn not Anti

True this one does have a normal sized head tube but still 2 full Scoble bricks to the bars. Most people would run spacers

agreed! in my mind Surly wants to keep the classic looks of horizontal toptubes but with the functionality of a low stand over height, resulting in a tower power.

I (only) have 20mm of spacers on my cross check, doesn't look too bad, anyway, who cares nowt wrong with spacers, unless of course you just ride yer bike on instagram.

Surly geometry is one of the most ridiculous things in the bike industry, up there with Paul cranks, DBAD and motordoping mamils.

Please stahp posting pictures of that crust!
So tempted. Lack of research and a little leg work makes it tempting.

surly just blogged about their pack rat .. making a frame around a rack with brakes that work, they forget s&s couplers... what a load of wank

I think it looks ace, nearly paid a fair bit to Argos to do the same to my ES until I decided to do it on the cheap. Might have to try one if I get the chance.

Yep.. The person who build these know what they are doing

Literal perfection in my eyes.

who cares nowt wrong with spacers.

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.

Well said

Surly are also priced for baby boomers

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.

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)

CK stack is more than 30mm ed

I have always wondered about that. I'm not saying a load of spacers is always bad, but a stack of £0,05 aluminium spacers must have an effect on ride quality. There is a reason why the headset bearings aren't in the middle of your headtube..

Only the top bearing adds stack height. Which is about 17mm if I remember correctly.

but a stack of £0,05 aluminium spacers must have an effect on ride quality.

It's not so much the type of spacers, but the amount of exposed steerer, unfortunately I cannot comment on how much it cause an effect on ride quality.

I enquired with Cannondale about fitting a steerer extension on their Cannondale Synapse alu a while ago with an alu steerer as a customer want his handlebar even higher, they actually don't recommend this at all.

I will have to look into this, I know a lots of manufacturers actually says it would be dangerous to have too much steerer on their bicycle.

CK stack is more than 30mm ed

Got the wrong measurement from the fact sheet.

Not really, a longer headtube would have the same impact on handling, obviously the higher you go the shorter the effective tt becomes (due to headtube angle). It's not like your putting extreme forces through the headset bearings, the limiting factor is the steerer material, you wouldn't want Surly fitting full carbon forks and then bung a shitload of spacers on there.

Well no and no.

You build up tension between your 2 headset bearings to counter flexing at the crown race. Longer head tubes have better leverage on the "pivot" of your crown race. (Sorry my English is not up to scratch for these explanations).

And if we're talking about a 40mm stack of spacers your toptube will shorten by 0,6658mm.....

If we're not going for looks, just get out your positive 35 degree stem.

Get your point. But surely the flex from your wheel and tyres absorbs most of the day to day riding stress loads placed on the headset bearings. Unless you brake extremely hard on the front wheel in a straight line forcing the forks to deflect backwards. I've never in my many years of riding had to replace a worn headset, that wasn't due to dirt/water ingress, maybe I'm just have a very graceful riding style.
I know that the further apart the bearings are the better any load is shared, but I've always been short and therefore had relatively short headtubes without any problems.