Do I need an S40?

[WIwireweaver]

After not riding a bike at all for a decade, I bought a Q45 last November and have finally been able to get out and ride consistently this spring (central Wisconsin). I am enjoying the heck out of it! Except for the unexpected recumbutt. I know I am not as strong as I used to be, but I am getting stronger! That being said, I am really tired of being slow as molasses. If my average speed hits 11mph, I am lucky. I am signed up to do RAGBRAI with the CruzBike group and already anticipate spending 10-12 hours traveling (ride time at 10 mph plus lots of breaks). Am I on the wrong bike? Would an S40 be better? A fair amount of my current riding is gravel roads and trails, and looking into the future, I want to ride all the rail trails in my region and also want to bike the Mickelson Trail in South Dakota. Thoughts?

 

[cpml123]

I use Q45 to bike to work in the summer. I do find it a few mph slower than S40 on pavement. I don't know if it's the geometry or the weight even though I adjusted the seat back similar to S40 with Thor seat custom set up, with AXS shifting, and with HED light gravel wheels. Urr!

If you want to go faster, you should look into S40.

 

[Ramnob42]

I've read in some of the threads the Q45 might be better at climbing hills than the S40. I haven't ridden RAGBRAI but hear that it isn't flat. Just another thing to consider. I just started learning to ride a Q45 and know my speed is not what it was on my LWB but believe it will increase with practice.

 

[woodguy]

I bought my Q45 the day they were released in 2018. Speed has never been my goal, but I have found that it is directly related to my physical conditioning (No surprise there), and the road conditions. I just completed today a tour from New Orleans to Key West. When I saw your post, I looked up my mph for each of the 21 riding days. They range from 11.7 to 14.9. Consider the need to stop at traffic signals & road conditions. There were about 15 bikes in our group - I was the only Cruzbike. I wasn’t the fastest or the slowest.

i can’t speak to whether the S40 would be faster as I’ve never tried one. Regarding recumbutt - my solution was a Thor seat reclined to about 35 degrees. That puts most of my weight on my back rather than my butt - no more recumbutt.

 

[CruzRider]

I have been able to get a 40 degree angle using a Thor seat On the Q45. It is the best of both worlds - speed and comfort.
I have a S40 (and the T50 and a V20), but I use the Q a lot more because of the comfort. Basically, if the route is bumpy, it has to be the Q.
The V20 is faster by 3mph, but I cannot really say the S40 is faster after the Thor seat mod.

 

[ak-tux]

After not riding a bike at all for a decade, I bought a Q45 last November and have finally been able to get out and ride consistently this spring (central Wisconsin). I am enjoying the heck out of it! Except for the unexpected recumbutt. I know I am not as strong as I used to be, but I am getting stronger! That being said, I am really tired of being slow as molasses. If my average speed hits 11mph, I am lucky. I am signed up to do RAGBRAI with the CruzBike group and already anticipate spending 10-12 hours traveling (ride time at 10 mph plus lots of breaks). Am I on the wrong bike? Would an S40 be better? A fair amount of my current riding is gravel roads and trails, and looking into the future, I want to ride all the rail trails in my region and also want to bike the Mickelson Trail in South Dakota. Thoughts?

I have an S40. I ride on tarmac most of the time and I can keep up (mostly) with my roadbike friends. Yes, it can be pretty fast when equipped with road specific components. If I was to ride gravel and relatively bumpy trails I think my speed will significantly reduce and so would the comfort. I would also have to put some large tires to compensate for the lack of suspension.

I think a well tuned Q45 should do better on gravel and bumpy trails than an S40.

 

[bentinitalia]

I second woodguy's observation that ones condition, plus road and wind conditions are bigger factors. I rode a Q100 (predecessor to the Q45, with the seat fully reclined) for years before getting an S40. The S40 is about 3-3.5 kgs lighter. That's a lot, BUT it's not just the weight of the bike, but the combined weight of you, the bike and whatever you're carrying. The difference for most people is a mere 3-4%, not much, and that's exactly what I found was my average increase in speed on the S40. Once you're completely comfortable with the Q and your condition has improved, then you may want to consider the S40. I will add, I truly love my S40, love the way it handles, its sportier feel, and if I'm not much faster, it seems faster.

 

[WIwireweaver]

I do know my strength and conditioning could/should/WILL improve, and god knows I could stand to lose about 40 pounds! All these improvements take time; I guess I am just being impatient. Thank you all for the observations and feedback.