After using some online fit calculators, I was looking around at some bikes and frames. Surly says to pick one based on the effective top tube, for which a recommended length for me is 53.5 cm. Some shops have told me to ride a 54 cm frame, others 52 cm, mostly just based on standover height. I have been sampling some bike geometry and noticed that CX/touring bikes sometimes tend to be very long for their height:
| Bike | Purp | Size | Eff. TT |
|-----------------|------|-------|---------|
| Surly Straggler | CX | 52 cm | 54.6 cm |
| Jamis Quest | Road | 51 cm | 53.0 cm |
| Giant Defy | Road | Small | 53.0 cm |
| Jamis Aurora | Tour | 53 cm | 55.2 cm |
| Jamis Renegade | Adv. | 51 cm | 53.2 cm |
| Jamis Renegade | Adv. | 54 cm | 55.1 cm |
| Jamis Bosanova | Tour | 51 cm | 54.0 cm |
| Jamis Bosanova | Tour | 54 cm | 55.5 cm |
| Soma Smoothie | Road | 52 cm | 53.0 cm |
| Soma Double-Cr. | CX | 52 cm | 55.6 cm |
| Soma Double-Cr. | CX | 46 cm | 53.1 cm |
| Trek Domane | Road | 52 cm | 53.0 cm |
| Trek 720 | Adv. | 52 cm | 53.8 cm |
So, for example, if I wanted to get a Soma Double Cross, by the effective top tube recommendation, I should go for the 46 cm frame? That seems tiny. By the top tube recommendation, Surly doesn't even make a Straggler small enough, but the extra 1 cm could be handled with a smaller stem? Is there a reason the CX/touring bikes are relatively longer? Wouldn't that result in a less upright, and therefore less comfortable position for long rides?