Originally Posted by
Chr0m0ly
That was my take as well, and then I found that LHT. Is that how a current bike is fitted? Because it looks like a too small frame fitted with a long tall stem, and a tall post. That’s where my fashion question came in. Is it in style, or more modern to have a smaller frame fitted with longer components? I’ve seen compact frames, but the LHT is a purpose built tourer, with a nearly level top tube. I would have expected them to look more like how the Trek is outfitted.
Surly has had bonkers geometry for quite some time. It's pretty irritating to a traditional geometry purist/logical thinker like me. Frames with top tube lengths far longer than they should be. It's like they looked at old Klein and Calfee geometries and then exaggerated them. Surly is an outlier, plain and simple, IMO. If you want some heads more properly connected to shoulders, then Soma is a much better bet. Surly, with their mega long top tubes, has slightly longer head tube lengths, and then a billion spacers on super ultra long steerers. It makes no sense. A lower top tube and cantilevered steerer/stem/bar setup for what? It's no mixte frameset, which has obvious and massive practicality benefits. Maybe it's just 'the Surly way' or who knows what. All the sloping top tube bike makers still have it pretty much correct. I do not hold Surly bikes in high regard, mostly for this reason, as that 'geometry' helps no one. Their 'fashion' is incorrect (per traditional geo), ugly, and not to be emulated, IMO. [I am editing out and not saying anything more past this point as it is unnecessary and I've made my point. Your Trek and anything else similar is proven and IMO how it should generally be. 35 years on, it still looks done properly.]