bigdurian

Hello,

I'm looking to purchase my first "real" bike, and I am deciding between these two. They're both the same price in Canada ($1500) and both are cromoly frame/fork...

Which one should I get for short commutes and some light weekend rides?

treebound 

You're looking at trucks when a sportscar would do. ;-)

If you like them both then go for the one that fits you better. If it were me, if I had plans to someday do a tour or even a 3-day overnight ride I'd go for the 520, but if my light rides included some off pavement back road rides down to a fishing hole then I'd go for the crosscheck. Those are two very different bikes with different design intent. Either will work for short commutes and light weekend rides, and either would probably be overkill for those uses. Nothing really wrong with that though, both are nice bikes.

ryanwood

The best advice I can give you is to test ride them, as much as is possible. I test rode at least 5 different bikes before I settled on the Crosscheck. If you are going to be going on rides longer than a few miles you are going to want a bike that fits you and is comfortable to ride on.

CliftonGK1

Things to consider:

Will you be carrying full panniers on you commute or weekend rides?
Will you be riding enough hills where you'll want the wider range of touring gears?

If so, then go with the 520. The longer chainstays will keep you from worrying about heelstrike on panniers (I've had some issues with my X-Check), and the stock gearing will keep you happy in the hills.
I use the X-Check as a long commuter (25-30mi r/t) and a randonneuring (fast touring) bike. I don't put a rear rack and panniers on it any more, just a large handlebar bag and a large saddle bag. I've had to do some modifications to get it ready for hills and for long distance:
New cassette; 11 - 32 PG970
New chainring; FSA 34t inner
New stem; Profile Aris 100mm/115 degree
New saddle; B-17 Imperial

Don't get me wrong, it's a great stock bike and if you're doing shorter weekend rides (under 100k) on not-too-hilly terrain it's going to be awesome. Just for hauling any amount of stuff on a commute or tackling big hills, the 520 is going to be a better off-the-rack solution.
For that matter, you may want to look at the Long Haul Trucker in comparison to the 520.

bigdurian

Thanks for the replies people.

My commute might be short (1.25 mile each way) but it's almost all uphill one way (so all downhill when I go back home).

Right now I'm riding a cheapo mountain bike and I wear a backpack, however I would like to use a sort of pannier that can easily be mounted and removed and carried as backpack/messenger bag.

I am actually interested in the "vintage" look of those frames, as opposed to flashy frames full of stickers. I also like the look of a horizontal top tube (which is the case for cross check but not 520).

So I gather 520 should be compared to LHT instead of CC?


Also, since I'm not too good with components yet, I was wondering if I would get better components on the 520 since the difference between US retail (1329 USD vs 1500 CND) is small compared to the cross check (1050 USD vs 1500 CND), so I am paying extra for buying in Canada, but not better components?

Also, which one would work better in Canadian winter?

treebound: What would you recommend instead? Should I go for a kona dew drop or something instead? I don't plan on getting many bikes so I would like one bike to do it all.

modernjess

The both could, but I do know that the Cross Check has plenty of tire clearance room which might serve you well in the winter if you want to mount studded or a wide tires with aggressive tread.

I use 35mm studded tires on my CC for the Minnesota winters. I'm not sure if the 520 has that much clearance, I could be wrong but the pictures and specs on the Trek sight are inconclusive.

treebound 

Uh, you've just entered the vintage zone by saying you like the vintage look and the level top tube. So my advice would be to hop up to the C&V section and start seeing what some of the folks in there ride. You could probably find a nice older bike for under $200, rebuild/overhaul it and add new tires for under $100, and then use the remainder of your $1500 to outfit it very well with a rack and bags and multi-tool and frame pump, and some commuter type cycling clothes and shoes. That's all if you wouldn't mind an older bike.

But my gut tells me you'd probably be happy with the 520. The crosscheck might be a little livelier (sp?) and slightly faster on the road, but you'll arrive relaxed and happy on the 520. And if you're thinking panniers then the 520 wins IMHO, especially if you are bigger or have larger feet.

diesel_dad

I have an LHT and I love it. If it fits, I suspect the CC will be a better frame in the long haul. If you have a commute that's all uphill in one direction, then make sure you get a triple crankset (depending on how strong you are, the Sugino crankset on the LHT complete can even be setup with 48-36-24) and a 9-speed mountain bike cassette (11-34) and long cage derailleur on the rear. The combo gets me up 20% grades in Victoria without too much drama.

The CC complete comes with cyclocross gearing (48-36 double crankset and 11-27 rear cassette) which, IMHO, is not a wide enough range for commuting in a really hilly area.

BTW on the LHT last night, the 48-36-24 crankset with 11-34 cassette still got me up 59.5 kmph on a steep downhill.

Michel Gagnon

Between the Crosscheck, LHT and 520, here are the major differences :

- Crosscheck :
Comes as a double. So if you like to climb hills easily, you will find them much more difficult than with your mountain bike. You could ask the bike shop to install a granny , but that probably involves a new, longer spindle, so a few dollars to plan for.

Sportier than the two other ones. Will feel sportier on fast rides, but potholes might feel a bit harder. And if you pack a week of grocery on the bike, it will be a bit less stable (though good racks are paramount for that kind of load).

– LHT :
This is the one with the lowest gearing.
Also, if you are short, the smaller sizes come with 26" wheels.

- 520
You will probably buy a 520 a couple cm higher because it has a slightly shorter top tube.
I also think they almost always come with a cut steerer tube, so that could be an issue if you like high handlebars. Also there is limited clearance for tires: 700x37 fit easily in the back, but that's a very tight fit in the front.

For a 4-season bike, I would recommend either the Crosscheck or LHT (my favourite). In either case, if you replace tires with 700x28 to 700x32 slicks, you'll have a great communing/sports machine. And when winter comes, you either install 700x37 knobbies (if there is little or no ice) or 700x37 Nokian Hakkapelliittas. On both these bikes, there is plenty of room to use such tires with fenders.

bigdurian

Hello Michel,

I'm from Montreal too... I went to le Yeti last weekend to see the surlys but haven't tried them yet.. the prices was a bit high compared to US retail, I have yet to check the other two surly dealers for their prices, do you think they're the same (abc and velodidacte)?

I don't plan on doing any long tours so I think LHT/520 might be overkill for me now. What do you ride?

exile

What are your plans for the bike? For a short commute any bike mentioned (520, LHT, CC) should be adequate. Both the 520 and LHT are considered touring bikes made to be comfortable over the long haul while being stable carrying loads. The Cross Check from what I read is a good all around bike capable of light touring while being slightly faster for road use. However, due to your short commute I don't think you would notice an appreciable difference in speed between the three.

Like some posters before me mentioned ride as many bikes in your size that you can. Use some of the conversion charts to help with sizing, but couple that with experience of being on the bike. And since you consider this to be your first "real bike," get some help from a reputable bike shop. Changing from one biking position to another will take time for your body to adjust. Just be patient and take notes on how you feel (to stretched, to cramped, or whatever other observations). It took me many months and many miles to figure out what was right for me .

bigdurian

exile, where can I find conversion charts for sizing?

I bought a bike from a LBS, they were all from department stores so I really don't know how to fit myself to a bike...

I'm roughly 5'9" and 30 inseam, 165lb, any help based on those numbers? I'll swing by a LBS after my exams, but I would like to have a rough idea in my head.

treebound 

Surly has a sizing chart or formula linked from their frame section, ColoradoCyclist has one too that I can only usually find with a Google search, there are several formulas, I think even Rivendell has a sizing variation formula.

You're probably in the 50-54 frame size ballpark depending upon the bike geometry and how you're built. Sit on a dozen or so bikes with someone holding the bike up so you can put your feet on the pedals and you'll quickly figure out what sizing feels good to you.
Hope this helps some, I'm browsing with a phone so providing links isn't too easy.

Michel Gagnon

I don't know how are street prices for Surlys in U.S. (i.e. not from mail-order shops but from brick and mortar ones), but the fact QBP is not a major distributor in Canada certainly helps make the Surly more expensive here. Regarding prices and service, I have bought quite a few parts at ABC (and also at Le Yéti, but it's further away and selection is a bit less), but never bought a bike there. I think that both ABC and Le Yéti will provide you with professional service, but I feel – rightly or wrongly – that there is a more personal touch at Le Yéti. As for Vélodidacte, I have absolutely no experience with them.

And what do I have? A Trek 520 bought in 2000 (last year with threaded headset) from La Porte à Bicyclette. They since moved from Montréal to Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu. I enjoy it, except for limited clearance around the front wheel. This is a bit limiting in Winter, in that the front fender packs easily with wet snow. Once the children are older, I would like to do some offroad touring (on gravel roads through ZECs and other semi-protected areas); for that, a touring bike that accepts 700x40-42 tires would work a bit better. But for on-road touring or to ride in the city, loaded or unloaded, this ie a great bike.

Would I recommend it to you? I tend to find that touring bikes are the most versatile bikes you could find. However, I am not a fast rider nor do I like sprints and the like. I prefer to have a more comfortable ride that lasts a few hours at, say 20 km/h. As a bonus, the bike also behaves very well when I load it with 1-2 weeks of groceries in panniers.

Bekologist

like M. Gagnon says above, if you are even vaguely considering running studded tires on this bike, CrossCheck or LHT. the 520s suffer from limited front wheel clearances for some obscene reason.

I've owned all three of those bikes and are all very very capable bikes for commuter riding. Crosscheck is ever so slightly twitchy - a 'fast handling' bike compared to the rock-solid LHT or 520 handling characteristics.

I'd go LHT for the win.

vik 

+1 -

LeeG

your criteria or so broad that either would work. One vote for the Cross-Check is the ability to put larger tires on. I'm not familiar with the largest tire you can put on the 520 but I wouldn't get a bike that couldn't fit 700x35 with fenders. I'd pick the 520 or crosscheck over the LHT as a commuter bike.

illwafer

trek 520 would be great, but not at $1500 (even CAD). you should be able to find one for 1/4 of that price if you are patient.

exile

I think Treebound summed up all of the sizing charts I was thinking of. Some people prefer bigger bikes, others prefer smaller bikes, it's all up to you and your comfort. I am about 5'9" also and ride a 54cm LHT. I was fitted I think for a 23" Trek 520 but I think the year of the bike was 2008 or something like that. I felt the reach was a little long for me, but with some adjustments it was doable. I got to ride a couple of years older model 520 21" I believe, and felt the reach was to short (it was used so I'm not sure of modifications). I was lucky enough to stumble upon a guy with a 56cm (I believe) CC at a bike co-op and he let me ride his bike around .

The 54cm LHT and smaller come with 26" wheels. For me it's about perfect. But like I stated before I rode a bunch of different bikes (Aurora, 520, LHT, CC, T2) over a period of time. Most more than once, with a note about size and what I liked or disliked. I simply went to the websites and compiled a spreadsheet regarding the sizes (even sizes I didn't ride but w/n my ballpark), geometries, prices, etc., and compared them to the notes I had. I took the advice of a lot of posters and just rode as many as I can (Thanks guys ). A thread search was extremely valuable, but remeber it's going to be you on the bike.

All the bikes were nice in their respective ways. I simply ranked what was important to me (comfort, durability, speed, accessorization, $$$, goal, etc. (in no particular order)), and went from their.

dirty tiger

I know very little about the Trek 520.

I do know that my Cross Check makes me very happy as both a commuter and a recreational vehicle.

You say that this will be your first "real bike", in that case I think the Cross Check will be perfect for you.

exile

Also bigdurian, the way you size yourself for a bike is going to be different. Even though I am about your same height, some measurments take place with or without shoes on. Some want to know your torso length, your arm reach, your inseam length (not pants inseam), etc.. Some websites have advice about going a bit bigger or smaller on a frame and so forth depending on the type of riding you plan on doing. Some places just look at your standover and make suggestions. Just ride as many as you can. Because you are about my height the only estimate I can give you is 54 -56cm size only as a starting point. You may be able to fit a little larger or smaller, but I don't think by much. A good bike shop would help you narrow it down. I think Michel Gagnon might have a better idea about the bike shops in your area.

bigdurian

thanks for the reply everyone, I did some search around and saw a lot of "x vs cross check" threads, must be quite annoying.

so I ask the LBS if I can take a ride outside the shop?

I think the cheapo mountain bike I have right now is also 26" wheel.. but I've never rode any other types of bike so I'm not sure about the wheel size.

I do think I have short legs for my height though so 54cm is probably a good start!

Is there a thread on how to buy bikes somewhere, I feel weird trying and not buying after lol

bmike

xc.

commuter, light tourer, dirt machine.
gears or single speed or fixed or internal hub.
flat bars or drops.
wider tires and fenders.

vik 

+1 - nice looking ride...

bigdurian

If you guys park your bicycles indoor during winter, do you clean off all the snow first?