Q45 vs S40

Tuloose

Guru
The OP might give some thought to starting out with a T-50. I have used mine on gravel roads and trails and it has performed quite well. I even got it up a steep gravel switch backed logging road here in Oregon.
I run Michelin Protek Cross 1.6" tires at around 45 lbs when on gravel rides. The seat can be laid back more than the 50 deg position by cutting some length off the back supports. I laid mine back about another 5 deg. It makes a great around town commuting and shopping bike too. With voluminous Banjo Brothers shopping panniers on the rack I can really bring home the bacon. I have a doggy carrier that attaches to the rack for taking my 18 lb dog to the park.
I once had a dual suspension Freerider but I found the suspension to be more of a drawback and of little advantage comfort wise. The T-50 is more nimble and lighter and with proper tires can be fairly comfortable on gravel. Just remember that when the roads gets steep that's where the front wheel drive is at a distinct disadvantage. I tell people that a Cruzbike is the worst mountain bike ever although it's OK on moderate and even some steep slopes if you sit up to move your weight forward and concentrate on smooth power delivery.
 

Parker135

Member
The OP might give some thought to starting out with a T-50. I have used mine on gravel roads and trails and it has performed quite well. I even got it up a steep gravel switch backed logging road here in Oregon.
I run Michelin Protek Cross 1.6" tires at around 45 lbs when on gravel rides. The seat can be laid back more than the 50 deg position by cutting some length off the back supports. I laid mine back about another 5 deg. It makes a great around town commuting and shopping bike too. With voluminous Banjo Brothers shopping panniers on the rack I can really bring home the bacon. I have a doggy carrier that attaches to the rack for taking my 18 lb dog to the park.
I once had a dual suspension Freerider but I found the suspension to be more of a drawback and of little advantage comfort wise. The T-50 is more nimble and lighter and with proper tires can be fairly comfortable on gravel. Just remember that when the roads gets steep that's where the front wheel drive is at a distinct disadvantage. I tell people that a Cruzbike is the worst mountain bike ever although it's OK on moderate and even some steep slopes if you sit up to move your weight forward and concentrate on smooth power delivery.
You make a really good point. However, I have a line on late model a T45 for less than the price of a T-50, although I haven't searched for used ones. I could see having a light set of wheels for road and another wider set for gravel. Thanks for your comments.
 

2whluge

Active Member
Lots of comments here about seat angle. On my old Volae, I could go from flat to bolt upright depending on the me and the circumstances. On a S40, you’d better be sure you like the recline, which obviously many here do. My beef with the Q45 is that changing the angle is not simple and the seat shape sucks. I may try the Volae seat and figure the hardware to make it easier to adjust.
 

Margo

Member
Ah, great to hear, Kjameswil76 and Margo. I have also now heard from Morgan at Cruzbike. I totally accept that the S40 is a faster bike, but I wanted to be sure I wasn't buying a ponderous heavy bike that I wouldn't enjoy on regular paved trails. Before converting to a recumbent, I was riding a Salsa Fargo with 44mm tubeless tires and keeping up with my friends okay, so I'm feeling better about the Q45. Thank you!

I even added a motor to the QX-100 for my partner.
 

Attachments

  • QX-100 with motor.jpeg
    QX-100 with motor.jpeg
    770.6 KB · Views: 6
Top