THE NEW Q IS COMING

[Balor]

Brilliant!

But I wonder about the angle of the shock. Isn't a shock supposed to be as perpendicular as possible to the force exerted on the pedals? That minimizes pogoing, which occurs when the rider is pumping the shock with each pedal stroke. The original Qs had such a shock orientation, but from the photo, it looks like the new one could cause bad pogoing when pumping hard. Opinions?

Shock installation angle has absolutely nothing to do with 'pogoing'.
This is a bit of a complex topic, but if you are really interested in knowing how it really works google 'anti-squat suspension geometry'. In short, you need axle path as perpendicular as possible to squat vector, which depends on center of rotation:

https://www.quora.com/What-is-anti-dive-and-anti-squat

Linkage forks where axle path actually moves forward and up don't squat under braking, for instance. (But bump compliance suffers, I suspect) - because their axle path is nearly perpendicular to squat vector, while conventional forks are nearly parallel to it, plus there is forces at the tire and calliper to think about. Due to a combination of this factors some linkage forks (on motorcycles) actually RISE under braking.

Since we don't deal with chain forces and brake forces on FWD bent's rear suspension when simply pedalling along, 'suspension bob' is, in fact, due to 'sine wave' of acceleration and deceleration due pedal strokes and air/gravity/rolling resistance and resulting weight transfer.
Having a rearward axle path will help here, and due to high pivot it WILL be a bit rearward. Plus, due to longer wheelbase and relatively low CG of bents suspension bob should be much less even with 100% pro-squat geometry - due to much less resulting weight transfer.

TL;DR:

No, it is not a problem at all.

 

[benphyr]

I am amazed every time I read our forum on how much I learn and the great wealth of knowledge that is in the Cruzbike Tribe and is shared in understandable, clear fashion. And without criticism.

@Balor does all that you explained above mean that lengthening the wheelbase and changing the shock angle will both improve the bounciness I experience on my QX100 previous model?

Cheers,
Ben.

 

[Frisard]

Now I am really curious if it will have a frame-set option as well? I have some 29er (700c) wheels I bet will fit in there with road tires.

Or a front end kit for my qx100!

 

[super slim]

I hope it has a Silvio S40 stiff front triangle, and the Quest suspended rear suspension, so it can fit into a USA airline 26"*26"*10" box

It looks like all my wishes have come true!!!!

It is sensible for Cruzbike to have the same power triangle for three of the four models, with wide forks for the S40 and Q45, and narrow for the V20!

 

[super slim]

Always gotcha covered, Mark...


View attachment 6458

With two of them, on a 10% descent, you could get airborne!!!

 

[Balor]

I am amazed every time I read our forum on how much I learn and the great wealth of knowledge that is in the Cruzbike Tribe and is shared in understandable, clear fashion. And without criticism.

@Balor does all that you explained above mean that lengthening the wheelbase and changing the shock angle will both improve the bounciness I experience on my QX100 previous model?

Cheers,
Ben.

Again, "shock angle" has nothing to do with anti-squat characteristics, but if you change your shock mounts on existing frame that will alter suspension characteristics and may impact travel and geometry. What you need to look at is axle path. Axle path is the 'line' your swingarm 'draws' as it goes though it's travel.

All in all, lowering CG and extending the wheelbase is surest way of reducing or outright eliminating suspension bob, since you cannot use chain forces to provide anti-squat (and this is notoriously tricky to accomplish reliably anyway, because if you overdo - your bike with still bob, but your suspension will EXTEND with each pedal stroke... and this force varies with chain angle as in - gear combination. Like I said, pretty complex stuff, hence my prototype FS mbb will be URT).

My DIY MBB with rear suspension does NOT bob, at all, under no circumstances, and it has the least expensive air shock I could find (so no platform).
But it has 130cm of wheelbase and 30cm seat height, with ~35 deg seat recline. I also never ever run into front wheel traction problems when climbing (except in loose dirt conditions) for same reason - very little weight transfer under climbing and acceleration.
Too bad it weights 50 pounds and has aerodynamics of a brick, heh.

 

[Balor]

improve the bounciness I experience on my QX100 previous model?

Oh, and to answer your question directly, you'll need to look at change in CG height and wheelbase length.
Since recline and seat height seems to be the same unless my eyes deceive me, a bit extended wheelbase will make the bob a bit less (and make it climb before running into wheelspin a bit better), but since increase is pretty small, the difference might be imperceptible.

 

[billyk]

Axle path is the 'line' your swingarm 'draws' as it goes though it's travel.

Well, that is very interesting (and thanks for the link and search pointer). Thus, with the Q's single pivot point, the angle of the shock makes no difference at all for the pogoing, yes? Of course the angle does affect the efficiency of the shock action, which would still suggest that it be perpendicular to the swingarm travel.

That said, the shock itself appears to make a large difference. Switching out the stock (spring) shock of my Q2 for an air shock (Kind A5-RR1) made a very noticeable difference in both the ride and the power: it stiffened the bike overall and in particular reduced the power-draining pogoing. There've been a few threads here discussing this; search for "air shock" or "kind shock". (@benphyr this could be the case for your machine's bouncing, worth checking out).

 

[Balor]

Well, that is very interesting (and thanks for the link and search pointer). Thus, with the Q's single pivot point, the angle of the shock makes no difference at all for the pogoing, yes? Of course the angle does affect the efficiency of the shock action, which would still suggest that it be perpendicular to the swingarm travel.

That said, the shock itself appears to make a large difference. Switching out the stock (spring) shock of my Q2 for an air shock (Kind A5-RR1) made a very noticeable difference in both the ride and the power: it stiffened the bike overall and in particular reduced the power-draining pogoing. There've been a few threads here discussing this; search for "air shock" or "kind shock". (@benphyr this could be the case for your machine's bouncing, worth checking out).

Yea, the less perpendicular shock to suspension travel is, the more leverage you get, but the more friction is there in shock mounts (because it would rotate as it goes though the travel... can be solved with needle bearing kits, but it is NOT a cheap option).
And yea, I agree that air shocks have inherent sticktion and hence do come with a bit of a 'platform' built in by design . Unfortunately, unlike finely tuned low-speed compression, it negatively affects small bump compliance... which is, admittedly, much better delegated to good tires. Wide-ish, low pressure tires handle small stuff TONS better (which suspension is ill-equipped by deal with due to much larger inertia/unsuspended mass), but do almost no damping and hence for big hits you need a proper suspension with a damper (something that very low-quality shocks do not always provide, or at least in adequate amounts).

This is why I'm a large fan of suspension myself and would never ride a bent on our roads without at least rear suspension. Fully-suspended MBB is in the works, though it does require some sacrifices (I'll not be setting any climbing records on this one) and I hope I'll be able to improve on the design.

 

[Mark B]

It looks like an up-side-down U mount under the seat so the seat incline can be adjusted quick a bit. Cut down the steer tube and you have a speed machine like V and S, but with the comfort of an air shock.
Yes, it hits virtually all my wish list as listed on post #9.

It looks to be like the hot ticket would be to lower that seat and then the recline, if necessary, then whack about a foot off that steer tube. You'd lower your C of G somewhat and in effect, raise your bottom bracket in one move. Definitely some possibilities with this bike!

Mark

 

[Mark B]

Always gotcha covered, Mark...


View attachment 6458

Good looking out, Doug, good looking out! LOL!!

 

[jphipps]

Since we all have the picture of the Q45, some questions for Lucia.

1. What does the bike weight as pictured?
2. The shock looks a lot like the mechanical shock I received on the Quest 3.0. Is it a mechanical shock?
3. Is their an elliptical chainwheel included?
4. It appears as though the Dual Drive is gone, to bad as that feature helps when riding in traffic ( lots of stop and go). Will the front fork accept a Dual Drive wheel?

If anyone on the board can answer please do!

 

[Lucia]

Since we all have the picture of the Q45, some questions for Lucia.

Hi @jphipps - some of these questions will be answered in Q45 Insider emails coming down the pipeline over the next couple of weeks. Tomorrow's email has a bit more info on the shock and you'll get an email dedicated to tech specs closer to the launch date.

 

[billyk]

@Lucia - you have probably never posted a photo online that been scrutinized, zoomed in on, drooled over as much as this one. You really know how to keep a bunch of guys in suspense.

 

[Pollock]

4. It appears as though the Dual Drive is gone, to bad as that feature helps when riding in traffic ( lots of stop and go). Will the front fork accept a Dual Drive wheel?

Wasn't the dual drive discontinued? That would make it hard to use. To allow great shifts while stopped, there are other options for front and 'rear', but those add a bit too cost.

 

[dtseng]

We cannot see from the picture whether there is a stalk with FD hanger on the chain stay or not.
If there is one, you can install FD and 2 chain rings. And you can buy the left shifter such as Microshift R11 for about $20.

 

[woodguy]

@Lucia - you have probably never posted a photo online that been scrutinized, zoomed in on, drooled over as much as this one. You really know how to keep a bunch of guys in suspense.

I think that is part of the marketing plan!

 

[billyk]

Lucia titillates us a bit more this morning ... On quick look:
- the use of a full-length shock does give a lot more choices. As far as I could tell the only available 125mm air shock was the Kind AR-RR1. There are more possibilities at 165mm.
- Are those two-tone bikes??!!?? YMMV, but that yellow-blue one is ... not to my taste. And does the orange one have a red swingarm?
... gotta get back to work ...

 

[dtseng]

How well the bike will sell depends on its CP-value (characteristics/price).
If the price is $2,499.99, would you be still excited about Q45?
Or you'd rather get a S40 or even V20?

 

[Rampa]

Those two-tone colors may be early-bird option, like the T50 had. The gray is probably standard. It looks nice having the frame and fork the same color, in my eyes.

As for the shock. If your going to upgrade to an air shock, it can even be longer and give you the same head angle, with just a bit more sag. You can also go shorter if you like a really relaxed head angle.