WTB: Surly Cross Check Frame

Once upon a time people looking for a relatively durable, but not too heavy drop bar frame went shopping for a “cyclocross bike”, because the manufacturers need to put everything into a category and there is no approved category for “bike with enough clearance for fenders, and tires that aren’t stupidly narrow, and I can put a rack on it, and it won’t break if I ride it on normal roads and bang it around a little”. Most of those bikes would never see a cyclocross course, but it was a somewhat more appropriate approved category than “road racing” or “mountain”. Since they were influenced by actual cyclocross frames they tended to cling to stupid cyclocrossisms such as the UCI tire size limit, and most couldn’t take more than about a 32 tire with fenders. Along came a new category, the “gravel racer”. Its new innovation was that it could take bigger tires. Why they could invent a category for that and not a useful category like “bike with enough clearance for fenders, and tires that aren’t stupidly narrow, and I can put a rack on it, and it won’t break if I ride it on normal roads and bang it around a little” is beyond me, but indicative of the stupidity of the bike industry. So you’re starting to see more of the kinds of bikes that normal people want to ride show up in the “gravel” category (while more bikes in the “cyclocross” category are getting specialized for cyclocross–carbon frames with no fenders, no racks, no water bottle bosses, etc). Everyone in the industry just ignores the fact that the “gravel racer” bike is no more likely to be raced than was the “cyclocross” bike. Denial is wonderful.

TLDR: take a look at the “gravel” bikes in addition to the “cyclocross” bikes, that’s where the cools kids are going

@DismalScientist 115985 wrote:

I thought these bikes are called “touring bikes.” Perhaps, I am just old.

A true touring bike tends to be a bit too heavy and low geared to be fun for commuting. There are lighter higher-geared bikes that are sometimes shoved into the “touring” category but I refuse to acknowledge them. There used to be a “sport touring” category, more like audax/randonneuring, but that isn’t an approved category anymore.

Should I just hit the elite button on myself?

@mstone 116000 wrote:

Should I just hit the elite button on myself?

I hit it for you.

Yeah, I’m really grateful for the gravel segment. Just like I’m grateful for the hipsters; I mean, I really *like* bacon and small-batch liquor — and even my macbook pro at work.

I would just observe that the bike categories seems to delineate by the intended use of the bike, so while gravel does seem like a useless new category, it does match up with the demands of the newly-popular gravel racing. Unfortunately, there is no single understanding of what exactly a gravel road is which is why we see some “gravel” bikes being just road bikes that fit slightly larger tires and others (most) being more like CX bikes with clearance for 40+mm tires & fenders.

I guess an exception to that rule is the fat bike, which probably should be called a snow bike. But that would make it harder to market to people that don’t need it — like anyone living around here.

@hozn 116013 wrote:

I would just observe that the bike categories seems to delineate by the intended marketing campaign of the bike

FTFY. I’ll believe they’re designed for racing when I start seeing racers with rear racks and panniers and full fenders. Most of those bikes will be sold to people who have never even been on a gravel road (the towpath or any other crushed stone MUP does *not* count for this purpose). But sex sells, and I guess an improbable race is a better thing to put at the top of your web page than a dumpy middle aged guy on his way to work.

@mstone 116023 wrote:

I’ll believe they’re designed for racing when I start seeing racers with rear racks and panniers and full fenders.

I was told if I wanted to do a CX race on my bike, the other racers would appreciate it if I took off the racks and fenders. Go figure.

@mstone 116023 wrote:

Most of those bikes will be sold to people who have never even been on a gravel road (the towpath or any other crushed stone MUP does *not* count for this purpose).

Or on a “fire road” (another popular term for the category). I’ve also started seeing “adventure bike” as well as “monster cross.” They’re all the same: drop bars, only slightly racy geometry, room for wide tires (in the 40 range), yada yada.

@mstone 116023 wrote:

But sex sells, and I guess an improbable race is a better thing to put at the top of your web page than a dumpy middle aged guy on his way to work.

Wait–have you been following me?

(I’m probably not dumpy. I just wanted to use that joke.)

@hozn 115946 wrote:

Pantani, you should check out the DC Used Bicycle Marketplace facebook group; they come up form time to time (and I swear there was a 54cm recently?). But in general, that’s a bad choice: no disc brakes.

Are you talking about Bike House? I went to their facebook site but could not find where they list things for sale. Thanks.