Expert Advice on a Used Quest 2.0?

[David Saxton]

Hi folks,

I was wondering if anyone had any advice or feedback on the Cruise 2.0? There's a used one up for sale in my area for a pretty good price (assuming the condition is decent). I've been eyeing up Cruzbikes for a while but have been unable to commit to buying a new one for lack of ability to test ride and get familiar with the range of bikes.

This would be an inexpensive way for me to get into the brand, and while not the sportiest, I do like this set-up with the rear suspension to use as a commuter / utility bike - possibly even adding an electric motor. I gather that this is a circa 2009 model based on it featuring a 3x9 "SRAM Dual Drive" which was a fairly short-lived product line as I understand.

I'm wondering if anyone knows:

1. If there's an easy way to retrofit or replace the rear rack that's on this bike to carry large panniers? The stock rack looks way minimal, and totally useless for keeping your panniers off of the rear wheel. It appears to be welded onto the seat support tube.

2. If I should be wary of the front boom attachment design with the ginormous riser and separate stem? - I noticed that newer "Q" bikes abandoned this style and instead have the boom connect directly to the handlebars like the S and V series do. That said, I don't mind the mustache bars, that's a comfortable if not-the-most-aero way to roll.

3. Does this bike have front suspension? It almost looks like it has a pivot in front and then maybe a head shock type thing int the fork?

4. Does the rear shock work in this design? Stroke and eye-to-eye length looks incredibly short compared to what I'm used to from mountain bikes, but maybe it's enough to yield a bit of travel for road use?

5. Can a headrest be added?

Thank you for any advice you have - there's such a depth of knowledge on this forum, I figured there's probably at least one person who's ridden on or tinkered with this model of bike before.

Side note: the Q's in general seem like a good candidate for a "rear" wheel electric motor conversion (using a "front" wheel kit) and this one certainly fits the bill since it uses older QR dropouts like the Bafang hub motors need. Not sure where I'd put the battery, but probably there's a way to strap it to the bottom of the frame, and it's convenient that there's just the one brake line to worry about routing around.

 

[David Saxton]

EDIT: I just realized this bike is called at Quest 2.0 - my bad! Forgive the typo... I can't figure out how to edit the title so hopefully the "right" people still find this thread .

 

[Doug Burton]

Hello, David,

1. This appears to be the accessory "heavy duty" rack, which replaced the seat support tube and the original, lighter-duty rack included with the original bike. The original rack was, ironically, equipped with pannier side supports. To retrofit, you'll need to find someone with the original parts including the seat support tube. Maybe someone would be willing to swap with you.

2. The stem riser is steel, plenty robust, and the arrangement serves just fine. The newer bikes have moved to a "harmonized" front structure design that serves across the range, except for the T50, which uses a slightly modified version of what's in the picture.

3. Front suspension was eliminated in this version of the Quest (and subsequently across the product range). The suspension forks were difficult to get manufactured and the benefit of less than 1" of travel was not worth the trouble, really. They require inspection and maintenance as they get older. I haven't spoken with anyone who missed the sprung front fork. You can tell a suspended fork by the "bellows" type rubber cover between the fork crown and the bottom of the head tube. I don't see it in this picture.

4. The rear shock works fine; the travel is adequate for road/street use, which was the intent. Some folks have upgraded this with higher-end shock absorbers and claim it helps the ride. This shock is a pretty simple spring and friction design. This bike wasn't intended to have mountain bike type suspension travel.

5. There are aftermarket headrests that can be attached to the seat back, but at these backrest recline angles, I doubt you'll need or want one.

This looks like a well-preserved example of the Quest 2.0.

Hope this is helpful.

Best,

Doug

 

[castlerobber]

3. Does this bike have front suspension? It almost looks like it has a pivot in front and then maybe a head shock type thing int the fork?

Older models did. I have a Quest 2.0 that came with front suspension. It wasn't a lot of help. I replaced the front fork with an unsuspended one after a year or two.

4. Does the rear shock work in this design? Stroke and eye-to-eye length looks incredibly short compared to what I'm used to from mountain bikes, but maybe it's enough to yield a bit of travel for road use?

It is short, I think 125 mm, and is for road use. It's a low-end Kind spring shock. Some of us upgraded to an air shock from the same manufacturer. If you buy the Quest and decide you want to upgrade the shock, start a "conversation" (PM) with me on the forums. I may have a spare in the parts box.

 

[David Saxton]

Doug and Castlerobber, thanks for the info and advice.

Sounds like a decent bike based on what you're saying, and I'm kind of glad to hear that the front shock was removed in this particular build. I noticed that no current CruzBikes employ a front shock; drive-wheel suspension is tricky to design to avoid pedal bob and single-pivot systems are the worst in that regard. The engineering and the suspension elements themselves can be super expensive and recumbent brands definitely struggle to get stuff that works well and can be serviced by the end consumer. My current RWD recumbent has a fork with one of those "head shock"-style things with the rubber boot on it like you're describing, and the internals are pretty weird - a splined piece of nylon is the bearing / bushing that the inner stanchion slides against. I'm enjoying it well enough but it's a funky design - if the splined interface gets loose you get steering play which is not great and would probably feel even worse on a CruzBike.

If the small, "heavy duty" rack has decent load capacity, I could probably buy a separate pannier rack and modify it w/ clamps of some sort to sit on top and drape over the sides, kind of like this beam rack here:

 

[Doug Burton]

Doug and Castlerobber, thanks for the info and advice.

Sounds like a decent bike based on what you're saying, and I'm kind of glad to hear that the front shock was removed in this particular build. I noticed that no current CruzBikes employ a front shock; drive-wheel suspension is tricky to design to avoid pedal bob and single-pivot systems are the worst in that regard. The engineering and the suspension elements themselves can be super expensive and recumbent brands definitely struggle to get stuff that works well and can be serviced by the end consumer. My current RWD recumbent has a fork with one of those "head shock"-style things with the rubber boot on it like you're describing, and the internals are pretty weird - a splined piece of nylon is the bearing / bushing that the inner stanchion slides against. I'm enjoying it well enough but it's a funky design - if the splined interface gets loose you get steering play which is not great and would probably feel even worse on a CruzBike.

If the small, "heavy duty" rack has decent load capacity, I could probably buy a separate pannier rack and modify it w/ clamps of some sort to sit on top and drape over the sides, kind of like this beam rack here:

View attachment 16241

That would probably work fine. On my Quest V1 I just removed the original rack parts and used an MTB post mount rack. If I needed pannier attachments they would work the same way as what you've illustrated here.

 

[Postapocalypsia]

My rack is a little different but this arrangement works with full panniers once I remove the Topeak slider.
The eye hooks locate the pannier and stop them moving.

 

[David Saxton]

That looks good for panniers!

Fyi: someone bought up the Quest 2.0 before I could get to it, so I got a used Streetmachine instead. Oh well, maybe I'll think about a CruzBike sometime in the future.

 

[billyk]

Older models did. I have a Quest 2.0 that came with front suspension. It wasn't a lot of help. I replaced the front fork with an unsuspended one after a year or two.


It is short, I think 125 mm, and is for road use. It's a low-end Kind spring shock. Some of us upgraded to an air shock from the same manufacturer. If you buy the Quest and decide you want to upgrade the shock, start a "conversation" (PM) with me on the forums. I may have a spare in the parts box.

I agree with @castlerobber on both points:
I had a Q2.0 with front suspension that didn’t do much and made the steering feel loose.
And upgrading the spring shock to an air shock (Kind RR1-A5) is a major improvement In the ride. The response is less bouncy and the frame stiffens. They cost less than $100 (or used to). Search these forums for RR1-A5. Lots of info here.