The Surly Cross-Check is a bike that established a firm following during its 24 years in the market, and now, this feature could be seen as its obituary. The Cross-Check was a bike that could be dubbed as one of the first ‘gravel’ bikes with its 45c tyre clearance and a versatile, tough-as-nails steel frame.
Despite its CX inspiration, the Cross-Check was a bike beyond the boundaries of defined cycling disciplines. It was used between the tapes on the muddy CX tracks, for commuting around town, and even became a popular choice for those seeking a versatile touring bike, or “a shitty MTB” to put it another way. Now, the bike has been moved to the ‘Legacy Lineup’ on Surly’s website, marking an end to an era.
> 8 bygone bike technologies we’re now well rid of
“What a wonderful bike that was,” is the first thing Surly’s UK Brand Manager Duncan Kennedy said when we asked if the rumours were true, and then confirmed what we’d assumed.
“Yeah it [the Cross-Check] has been discontinued with models like the new Preamble taking the mantle of the affordable parts swap frame many used the Cross-Check for.
“The main reason for it was the abundance of bikes now with disc brakes vs. canti mounts, those bikes people were swapping frames out for whether it was a crash replacement or just a new bike feel all went over to disc themselves leaving it not such an easy swap out. Not to mention the choice of canti or v brakes was getting rapidly slimmer.”
The Cross-Check was a real legacy model which Duncan sees as one of the first ‘gravel’ bikes for the masses. With 45c tyre clearance, comfortable mile munching geometry and mounts for all your adventuring needs it really set the tone for what so many riders look for today for their adventure/ gravel builds. What made it so great, then?
The Cross-Check’s frame was a simple yet versatile platform. It was made with size-specific 4130 CroMoly ‘Natch tubing steel tubes and offered ample clearance, numerous mounting points, and semi-horizontal dropouts. And talking of sizes, as many of Surly’s bikes the Cross-Check was available in a really wide range of sizes from 42 to 64.
> Best steel road bikes 2023 — versatile, durable and comfortable steeds
The whole package allowed riders to experiment with gearing, convert the bike to fixed gear or equip it with BMX hubs, and in general explore various setups. Despite the slightly shorter head tube, the Cross-Check’s steel frame made it a true everyday workhorse – and this quality is perhaps the reason bikes like the Cross-Check are having a resurrection in the cost-of-living crisis.
“It has been interesting since the Cross-Check went the huge resurgence of people looking to build rim brake bikes, I guess the popularity of the simple setup is something enthusiasts want.
If you’re sad about the Cross-Check entering the gravel bike graveyard, Surly does still offer bikes of similar characteristics…
“Model-wise, the Preamble which was released earlier this year really has the DNA of the Cross-Check with more modern features, but still an affordable option. Surly offered the Bridge Club as a 700c build for a while to bridge the gap until the Preamble was released, and to this day the Bridge Club remains one of our top sellers with options from 700 x 45c to 650 x 2.8” and with 26 x 3” (for good measure) wheel/ tyre setups,” Duncan said.
Have you owned a Surly Cross-Check? Do you agree it’s “one of the best
riding, most versatile bikes around”? Let us know in the comments. For more bike checks like this, head over here to see our collection of past Bikes at Bedtime.
-1024x680.jpg "“Clear anti-cyclist bias”: Lawsuit filed against Toronto police after cop doored cyclist… before ticketing rider over incident")
25 thoughts on “Farewell to the Surly Cross-Check, one of the first ‘gravel’ bikes that is now officially discontinued”
Had one for several years
Had one for several years (stock build except for the seat/tires) until it got stolen — good bike overall and great for the price! Very bang-up-a-ble, good quality frame and lots of barnacles.
Only drawbacks for me were the short head tube, as noted (you’ll see a lot of complaints about this — remember it basically started as a late-1990s CX bike) and canti brakes.
One step further into disc
One step further into disc brake hell…
I guess they’ll argue no-one
I guess they’ll argue no-one was buying the canti models any more, probably because folk on cantis/rim brakes are also probably the sort of demographic that doesn’t change frame very often and so can’t be sold newer and shinier every season!
I’ve got three rim brake setups to keep running, one a sort of franken-CX build on Avid Shorty Ultimate cantis which serves for ‘winter’ gravel rides where I don’t want to get my shiny bike filthy, then a shiny summer gravel bike on mini-Vs, and a singlespeed Charge Plug which I don’t really know what to do with but don’t want to sell!
I guess future builds will need to be custom steel framesets, luckily I’m not in the market for any sort of super-light gravel build…
“I guess future builds will
“I guess future builds will need to be custom steel framesets, luckily I’m not in the market for any sort of super-light gravel build…”
Like all classic parts it’s now either cheap and nasty or totally high-end and incredibly expensive…
The head tube may have not
The head tube may have not been the tallest, but in most builds, the steerer is generously extruding. These Surly crowned forks seem horrible to me, but seem super practical with their extended steerer tubes.
It is indeed weird that it took 15-20 years for other manufacturers to understand that people like to combine drop bars, fat tires and not too low riding position.
http://citizenrider.blogspot
http://citizenrider.blogspot.com/2023/10/beautifully-crafted-reliable-mediocrity.html
Very nicely written.
Very nicely written.
He could have written it along a theme of ‘diminishing returns’ as well.
E.g. there will have been some notional point in the past where bikes were already about 98% as good as they could be, and a lot of recent stuff (tubeless, discs, electric gears) is just making up the final 2%, at the expense of, well, expense, and stuff that lots of riders can’t fix at home now (or you could argue with discs and e-gears that maybe the ‘return’ is that less mechanically minded riders don’t HAVE to fix it as much).
Disc brakes, electric gears =
Disc brakes, electric gears = “good”? Entirely subject to interpretation…
Haha, I was playing devil’s
Haha, I was playing devil’s advocate, fully mechanical and rim brakes here
?
?
Sorry hadn’t really looked at your username from below…
IanEdward wrote:
How do you measure “how good a bike could be”? What are the parameters involved?
Some measure “good bike” by how fast they can get it to go for the power they put in. Others are concerned about comfort, stability and the like rather than fastest possible speeds for their input. Others again are concerned by longevity and resilience whilst some care about easy and inexpensive mendability. Some need their bike to be a nice frock or handbag! Some need it to be inexpensive to buy; some (mostly frockers) like it to be expensive..
Then there’s weight, folding, what it can carry and several other attributes some want in their bike whilst others don’t.
********
Anyroadup, your 98% figure is suspect.
Consider also this: what about e-gears is less fixable than similar non-e-gears? If your mechanical rear mech goes wrong, the liklihood is you’ll end up buying a new one rather than disassembling it, putting in a new bit then reassembling it. I know only one person who ever did this, taking weeks to actually get the replacement bit. If your e-mech goes phut, you’ll buy another one. The only difference is how much they cost. And e-gears are simpler to set up.
Disc brakes not only need less fixing but are no harder to maintain, replace parts on and so forth than are calliper brakes. I’d rather set up disc brakes than cantilevers anyday!
Tubeless tyres have already saved me about 10 stops to mend a puncture since I started using them. Pull out the thorn or other small sharp and the tubeless tyre self-seals, with no need to do anything – not even blow up the tyre. Even if you leave the thorn in, the tyre will go on working just as it does without a thorn – or even a dozen thorns.
Cugel wrote:
Just switched back from Ultegra Di2 to Dura Ace mechanical (not as a conscious choice, just swapping bikes to get one more suited to my ageing back and wrists (secondhand Specialized Roubaix)). Yes electronic gears are simpler to set up but for anyone halfway competent setting up and/or tuning a mechanical system takes five minutes a maximum of once a fortnight. In the six years I had Di2 I spent well over £300 down the LBS in repairs (broken battery holder and a damaged wire) whereas I’ve never spent a penny apart from new cables on any mechanical system. Di2 is lovely in operation, I admit, but actually having returned to mechanical I’m really not missing it.
Rendel Harris wrote:
Once a fortnight? I’d be a bit annoyed if my gears needed touching that often (and I don’t like a noisy drivetrain).
I don’t have an issue with electronic gears. But manufacturers may not want to continue making and supporting mechanical groupsets, which could end up leaving many bike owners with no option. Or then there are no replacement parts for your old electronic groupset.
Similarly, I can see the disc brakes make great sense but let’s not consign 120+ years of rim braked bikes to the skip. Yet Shimano have already discontinued their 57mm drop caliper brakes, leaving only the BR-R451, which “Must be used in conjunction with ST-4600, ST-4603, ST-5700, ST-5703, ST-6700 or ST-7900 STIs for correct leverage ratio”, according to the truly excellent SJS Cycles’ product page. The BR-R650 and BR-R450 calipers are almost impossible to find now.
Simon E wrote:
I’m probably a bit of a fussy, “sure I can get it just a bit better” mechanic, but also most of my day-to-day riding is in central London. With all the stopping and starting and changes of pace that entails I imagine my drivetrain gets a lot more chances to get knocked out of kilter than in some other riding enivronments.
Rendel Harris wrote:
Do you put that down to riding style/environment only, being electronic or 10/11/12 speed being less forgiving?
I have to adjust my 8 speed when I swap a wheel or fit a new chain but otherwise it just works.
Cable discs on the other hand are a pain even with longer lasting sintered pads so I’m trying TRP Spykes on the bike I’m building at the moment.
NOtotheEU wrote:
I think a lot of it is down to smoothness of ride, a couple of weeks of the hard accelerations and constant pace/gear changes that comes with commuting in London requires a lot more attention than the same bike used for the same distance over nice country cruises. Definitely drivetrains with fewer gears need less attention (in my experience) – Mrs H ‘s commuter has Claris 8 speed and I doubt I have to adjust that more than twice a year.
Thanks. I’ve resisted going
Thanks. I’ve resisted going to more than 8 speed because I prioritise reliability and always assumed more speeds would wear out more quickly, It’s interesting that they need more fettling too (also makes swapping parts on multiple bikes easier). The only problem for me is decent quality shifters have to be bought 2nd hand which can be a bit hit and miss.
Rendel Harris wrote:
Like you, I prefer STI mechanical of the quality demonstrated by, say, Shimano 11-speed 105. It works very well indeed once set up; and doesn’t need adjustment other than to take account of the initial new cable stretch. Mind, I like them cables all external – none of this f-ing about threading them through stems, frames and so forth.
I do have Ultegra Di2 on one bike. It just happened to come on that bike in a sale with 42% off, with everything else on it being fine & functional. The Di2 works but can be fussy (hesitant changes on a sprocket or two) about some cassettes of the non-Shimano brand; or the cheaper (non hyperglide) kind. You can’t just press the Di2 lever a teeny bit to make the chain climb on the hessy-sprocket, as you can with mechnical STI levers.
However, despite being tool and fixin’ mad, I draw the line at trying to revive a defunct rear mech, mechanical or electric. The issue is getting the parts as much as getting the parts to go back together again. Once they go sloppy & worn, that’s it.
Incidentally, I make my mechanical cables last years and years by dribbles of WD40 or similar down them after any damp ride. This is easy when the cables are bare and exposed, running along the down or top tube and the chainstay. I detest hidden cables for many reasons: hard to change, hard to maintain and (in some bikes) bluddy noisy rattlers. And they can drag more in the long outer housing and tight bends, making gear changes less than the nice clean snick-in of bare cable changes.
When you next change your
When you next change your cables have a consider of fitting Middleburn’s cable oilers, makes getting lube deep inside the cables easier, you can use up little bits of outer too.
Now I had stopped lubing
Now I had stopped lubing cables within hoses as (can’t recall where) I’d read that squirting lube down your cables was a bad idea. Also can’t recall the reason given – perhaps it was “…if you’re using a cheap / very lightweight water dispersant like WD-40 or even GT85 which might affect the inner” or “if using something which might gum up the cable”?
Clearly given these exist this must be a practice though. What lube do you use for yours?
The wonderfully lubricious
The wonderfully lubricious Finish Line Cross Country.
I use the frothy aerosol.
And the dribble version for the little bit in my Nokons on the good bike.
Gone for Rock n Rolls Cable Magic on my full run Nokons on the Ultimate Commuter though, and will on the Good Bike if I get it going again and recable it.
Thanks! Will give this a go
Thanks! Will give this a go on the hack bike.
And once the belt drive commuter returns restored from the LBS that also. Full length cable housing on that anyway so it *ought* to be running better longer. Finally on the hydro-brakes there so no worries about them…
chrisonatrike wrote:
I’ve read elsewhere that some housing cables have a slippery inner liner that, unfortunately, is subject to degradation and damage over time, producing a sort of plastic sludge that eventually causes friction to the inner cable rather than easing it’s movements.
Some inner cables I’ve seen also themselves have a thin plastic coating, supposedly there to protect them from moisture and perhaps make them more slippery. These coatings too can degrade and wear into a sticky plastic paste …. or so goes the rumour. I avoid them in favour of simpler cables and housings, meself.
Cugel wrote:
Some inner cables I’ve seen also themselves have a thin plastic coating, supposedly there to protect them from moisture and perhaps make them more slippery. These coatings too can degrade and wear into a sticky plastic paste …. or so goes the rumour. I avoid them in favour of simpler cables and housings, meself.
— CugelLocal manufacturer Fibrax stopped coating their inner wires with teflon for this reason a number of years ago. Apparently the best inner wires are slick stainless steel, where the wire is die-drawn so it has a smoother exterior to reduce friction. Plus stainless doesn’t corrode like a galvanised wire.
ktache wrote:
I do now have e-bikes with long runs of outer gear cable housing the inner cables. The oilers may be a good addition, given that these long housings also go inside the frame – although they’re all reasonably accessible as they’re within the Fazua motor/battery housing space in the down tube.