cs1

I'm not sure if this is really vintage but here goes. I've always liked the concept of the Bridgestone XO-1. It's a do anything machine with road bike geometry and 26" wheels. It kind of reminds me of the current Surly LHT which is another do anything bike. I realize the Surly might be more biased toward road use. Still, it has more in common with the XO-1 than it doesn't.

Let's hear it from all the experts.

illwafer

you can make this type of "machine" out of any bike that can fit larger tires.

you can take a run of the mill bike and make it 650b and you roughly have the same thing.

Johnny Alien

I think the Surly would be an excellent choice. They are one of my favorite current companies. Rivendell also has alot of choices. Considering that X0-1's sell for around a grand a Surly is probably close to the same price.

RobbieTunes

My friend Gene told he had a Surly Long Haul Trucker.
I said "aren't they all?" He got it.

For that alone, the LHT.

Fasteryoufool

I've always thought that riding around on a bike that said "Surly" on it was an outstanding notion.

jtgotsjets

I have no idea what this thread is about?

KonAaron Snake 

Which is the best bear?

I pick the Lemond Poprad,

and the Koala.

cs1

It's about comparing a vintage bike with a current model bike. Reading comprehension is a wonderful thing.

swen0171 

I'm interested in the 60cm Surly with 26inch wheels. Could be a great rough stuff bike, gravel roads, etc. I can imagine it set up with Albatross or mustache bars would be really cool. Anyone have one of the new offerings of tall frames with 26 inch wheels? I'd like to see a real life picture.

Loose Chain

Yes, it is, it makes heads twist off trying to get a look. Of all the bicycles I have had, my Surly gets the most attention and it is the plainest, simplest, heaviest, blackest, chunk of no lugged steel I have ever had, and I love it.

KonAaron Snake 

I have limited experience with Surly...but the Karate Monkey I have is a heavy frame with an incredibly harsh ride. I've had aluminum MTBs that rode more comfortably. I'm going to be changing it out for a Cross Check and I'll be praying to God it's more ride-able.

ClydesterD

No, it's not about comparing a vintage bike with a current model bike. Jtgotsjets was right, and you owe him an apology. This was poorly set up by the OP and I'm surprised it elicited any responses at all, but those that are here are all over the map. I can't see that this is about anything at all, and my reading comprehension is just fine.

KonAaron Snake 

+1

What's better...a Gibson Guitar or an iPhone?

theschwinnman

Fact: Black bears are best. Bears eat beets. Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica.

tashi

I found my CC super comfy. Too comfy when hammering on the road actually - the back end was pretty flexy compared to many road bikes. Damn nice off-road though, and smoooth.

What tires were you running on the KM? I find components, tires in particular, make the biggest difference on rigid mountain bikes.

KonAaron Snake 

I'm running Continental Sports Contacts...I've never used them before. I assumed the harshness was because of two main things...the straight fork and the weight. I built it up as a commuter with heavy wheels (sram 9sp internal and Sram generator hub), so I thought that might also be influencing the awful ride quality.

The Schwinnman - identity theft is a crime!

tashi

Yep, I'd expect that build to be pretty darn harsh (and heavy!) on the road. In general, I'd say that mountain bikes are overbuilt for road use, and all that extra tubing thickness = a pretty harsh ride, all things being equal.

My DeKerf was pretty smooth with slicks and a rigid fork, but it was built to be light and fast - the KM is a "durable" machine.

KonAaron Snake 

Tashi...yet the old Raleighs were heavy and rode just fine. The Diamond Back I had bought from Nikkorod was a little lighter, but still a rigid MTB and that thing felt FANTASTIC.

What do you think...would the Cross Check be a little less harsh? Considering my large tires on this, I'm amazed at how much you feel.

Johnny Alien

Really? I just re-read the original post twice and I am fairly confident it is asking if the Surly has alot in common with the XO-1. That would be comparing a vintage bike to a current model.

tashi

Yep, I think you'll be pleased with the change. I found the CC to be very comfy, but can't make a direct comparison as I haven't ridden a KM.

What size tires are you running? Maybe more supple tires will help, some tires just ride like cardboard. I just put some Grand Bois 28c's on my road bike and they're quite lovely. Your wheel build will also play a part - a tough niner mountain bike wheel should be much stiffer than a nice light road wheel.

Loose Chain

Never ridden a KM or an XO, but my Cross Check is quite comfortable but stiffer than many older spaghetti tube oldies. It is after all a cyclocross bike, the fork is moderate stiffness, the rear triangle as well, I am not heavy so I can hammer away with very little flex, the fat 32mm tires soak up most road vibration.

Thing with the Cross Check is that if you are buying this bike with the expectation of having the bar tops even to or above the saddle, forget it, the level top tube, high BB and compressed main triangle make for a bike with a moderately aggressive stance. If you want to sit upright, get the LHT or something like the Masi or the Double Cross with the sloped top tube which provides a higher head tube and thus higher bar position without resorting to a stack of ugly spacers and weird angle stems.

ClydesterD

I also just re-read the original post, and there's not a single question mark in it. It didn't "ask" anything. I see your point, and see how one could infer such a comparison, but readers shouldn't have to infer questions---if a question's there it should be clearly stated.

My point wasn't to bash the OP, it was to criticize the snarky response to the member who didn't see the same (unstated) question you did. He wasn't the only one searching for some sense in the thread.

chewybrian 

I just got a big one with 700. I had the 26 option, but the tallest frame with 26 would have been too small for me. I would wonder about geometry on the road with a big frame and 26 wheels, anyway. Wouldn't you change the trail, wheelbase, bottom bracket height, and such? I admire them for offering it for people who know what they want, but I don't think it's for me.

The "What is the thread about?" argument seems odd. The title says XO vs LHT, and the post says "Let's hear it from all the experts". The topic seems clear enough, with actually asking readers to compare/contrast the two bikes.

Sorry I don't know enough about the XO to offer comparisons. But, for a bike as transportation, affordable yet reliable, the LHT seems solid to me-no regrets, except not getting it sooner.

cs1

I know what the XO series bikes were. I think the late great Sheldon Brown summed it up nicely.

What I'm looking for is: does the current Surly LHT in it's 26" wheel version compare favorabley with the old Bridgestone XO-1? Both are basically 26" wheel road bikes.

cyclotoine

My thoughts.

If you are large enough to ride a 60cm why bother with 26" wheel unless you are offroading? There are plenty of excellent tires in 700c, so why slow yourself down with small wheels?

To jump the gun, you can build a plenty strong 36h 700c wheel with a trekking rim and good cold forged spokes.

As for the LHT, I had one, it was the heaviest most sluggish bike I ever had. I have a soma saga now and it is certainly a step up, but still it's not suppose to be a lively bike. The long haul trucker is just what it says it is, a juggernaut and heavy as **** hunk of steel which can haul a massive load but it slow and takes a lot more fuel to run. I would not recommend it to anyone unless they were going to put at least 50% or more of their miles on it as fully loaded touring.