The reason why this may seem wierd is because we tend to think of $\mathbb{R}$ as a one dimensional, single object, so the idea that quotienting out by some non-trivial subobject doesn't change it is naturally somewhat odd. However, let me give a more intuitive example. Suppose you have $A = \mathbb{Z}$ (or $\mathbb{Q}$, ... or really any other abelian group). Let $$A = A_0 = A_1 = A_2 = ... $$
Now consider
$$B = A_0 \oplus A_1 \oplus A_2 \oplus A_3...$$
$$B' = A_1 \oplus A_2 \oplus A_3 \oplus A_4 ... $$
Well clearly by just relabelling the indices we have $B \cong B'$. But at the same time $B' \cong B/A_0$, or thinking the other way $B \cong A \oplus B'$. So clearly, when we paste together infinitely many copies of the same group, adding another copy doesn't change anything about the structure. Note that while the above used countably many indices for simplicity, it works for any infinite direct sum.
Now, the thing is that once we discard the order and field structures of the reals, and only think of them as a $\mathbb{Q}$-vector space, they are no longer one dimensional. They are a vector space, but by cardinality concerns it must be of uncountably many dimensions. So the reals look like
$$\bigoplus_{i\in I} \mathbb{Q}$$
Where $I$ has the same cardinality of the reals (I'm not entirely sure, but I think this is where we start using the axiom of choice). So it's rather reasonable that cutting off a single copy of the rationals doesn't change the isomorphism class. Exhibiting an explicit isomorphism is hard, as it would require giving a basis for the reals as a vector space over the rationals, which cannot be done constructively.