Replace Q45 Shock with Metal Bar

[Black Hawk Down]

I'm curious about replacing the shock on a Q45 with a rigid bar or tube.

I have ridden many miles on very rough roads and trails with other recumbents, without any rear suspension, so it seems like an easy way to save weight and eliminate some problems with the Q45.

Have any of you that have tried this had any problems with this change, after more riding?

Look earlier in the thread. There's a whole discussion about this. I replaced my shock with an aluminum bar and it worked great. At least one other guy did too. I put the Amazon link for the bar in my post, along with some instructions.

 

[Rampa]

Another option, if you want to keep the current mounting hardware, would be to just replace the spring with an aluminum tube. If you find one the proper internal diameter, and not to thin-walled.

 

[BendBent]

Black Hawk Down, how many miles have you ridden on the rigid bar? It seems you ride with panniers. Do you use a non-Cruzbike rear rack? Thanks.

 

[JerseyJim]

I'm curious about replacing the shock on a Q45 with a rigid bar or tube.

I have ridden many miles on very rough roads and trails with other recumbents, without any rear suspension, so it seems like an easy way to save weight and eliminate some problems with the Q45.

Have any of you that have tried this had any problems with this change, after more riding?

I don't know what kind of shock the Q45 ships with, but there are some shocks that come with a lockout. It isn't always obvious but there is sometimes a dial or lever on the shock. If you don't have a shock with a lockout, you could replace your shock with one of those and preserve the ability to have rear compliance.

EDIT:: I see that Black Hawk Down suggested this on the first page of the thread. I didn't mean to duplicate the message.

 

[Tuloose]

After briefly looking over this post I wonder if any of you dedicated long distance tourists have ever considered the T50?
It seems to me the T50 offers a few advantages over the Q45 for loaded tours, one of which is the lack of a rear shock which seems to be a problem on the Q45, at least according to the comments on this forum topic.
We have 2 T50's in our Cruzbike family and find them to be wonderful, sturdy and good handling bikes. We have taken ours on many a dirt trail and with moderate pressure wide tires they preform well, maybe not quite as well as a Q but since the majority of our riding is on pavement we feel the trade off in cost and weight for increased comfort on dirt is not in our interest.
The model I have is a an 8 year old Gen 1 which came with braze on mounts for an underseat rack so potentially it could carry 4 panniers. My wife's T50 is a later model and lacks the low rider rack braze ons. I don't know if the current models have these or not but the website does mention that an under seat rack is an option. Both of our bikes have 11 spd, 11-42 rear cassettes combined with a 38t chainring.
The website says the seatback is adjustable from 53 to 76 degrees but the seat can actually be more laid back by cutting a few inches off the inner seat strut. I have ours at about a 45 deg angle which we find more comfortable.
The T50 is also the only bike in the Cruzbike lineup to come with quick release wheels making flat repairs and wheel changes so much easier.
Some early enthusiasts have modified the T50 with the eponymous Emeljay mod that replicates the boom configuration of the Silviio and Vendetta. I don't know of any testing that shows this mod to be of any benefit but I find that my T50 climbs as well as my Silvio. If I were to do a multi day tour that included a lot of gravel and dirt the T50 would be my choice.

 

[Black Hawk Down]

After briefly looking over this post I wonder if any of you dedicated long distance tourists have ever considered the T50?
It seems to me the T50 offers a few advantages over the Q45 for loaded tours, one of which is the lack of a rear shock which seems to be a problem on the Q45, at least according to the comments on this forum topic.
We have 2 T50's in our Cruzbike family and find them to be wonderful, sturdy and good handling bikes. We have taken ours on many a dirt trail and with moderate pressure wide tires they preform well, maybe not quite as well as a Q but since the majority of our riding is on pavement we feel the trade off in cost and weight for increased comfort on dirt is not in our interest.
The model I have is a an 8 year old Gen 1 which came with braze on mounts for an underseat rack so potentially it could carry 4 panniers. My wife's T50 is a later model and lacks the low rider rack braze ons. I don't know if the current models have these or not but the website does mention that an under seat rack is an option. Both of our bikes have 11 spd, 11-42 rear cassettes combined with a 38t chainring.
The website says the seatback is adjustable from 53 to 76 degrees but the seat can actually be more laid back by cutting a few inches off the inner seat strut. I have ours at about a 45 deg angle which we find more comfortable.
The T50 is also the only bike in the Cruzbike lineup to come with quick release wheels making flat repairs and wheel changes so much easier.
Some early enthusiasts have modified the T50 with the eponymous Emeljay mod that replicates the boom configuration of the Silviio and Vendetta. I don't know of any testing that shows this mod to be of any benefit but I find that my T50 climbs as well as my Silvio. If I were to do a multi day tour that included a lot of gravel and dirt the T50 would be my choice.

 

[Black Hawk Down]

I have to have at least a 30 degree seat back. Any higher and I experience recumbutt. I also don't like the dorky handlebars. I would need S40 type handlebars. Finally, I would want the Thor Carrier seat. Not sure if this bike is adaptable for it. I already have 3 CruzBikes. This bike isn't compelling enough for me to buy 4. I now have the S40 perfectly configured for touring. My V20 is still ridable but my Q45 was stripped for parts and I see no reason to revive it in the future.