Joined
·
380 Posts
Just a place to post to differentiate models.
https://www.oneupcomponents.com/collections/dropper-posts/products/dropper-post-v2
https://www.oneupcomponents.com/collections/dropper-posts/products/dropper-post-v2
OneUp Dropper V2
1 - 20 of 675 Posts
OneUp,
Your webpage for the V2 states "Compatibility: not compatible with all low shock style Santa Cruz bicycles". Depending on how I read this it's either all lower link SC bikes are out, or only some are out.
Furthermore, some of your promo shots show the V2 on what looks to be a Megatower. Bottom line: is the V2 compatible with the Megatower?
Thanks.
Your webpage for the V2 states "Compatibility: not compatible with all low shock style Santa Cruz bicycles". Depending on how I read this it's either all lower link SC bikes are out, or only some are out.
Furthermore, some of your promo shots show the V2 on what looks to be a Megatower. Bottom line: is the V2 compatible with the Megatower?
Thanks.
Also interested to know the answer to this but for the Nomad 4. Why would it not be compatible?
Joined
·
380 Posts
The new low shock style Santa Cruz bikes have tube-in-tube dropper routing that is so tight that you can't get the 4mm of housing movement required for proper feeling operation. It is only SC bikes that we know to be a problem.
We are working on a retrofitable option that will be rolled in once available. The Megatower in the press release is testing that system (it belongs to our sales manager).
Sorry for any confusion.
How does it work on frames that clamp the cable outer?
I'd seen some people mention it's the cable outer that actuates the post but just thought they had it set up wrong as it didn't make much sense.
Can you explain why the outer needs 4mm movement for it to work? Interested to know how it works, love the idea of a post with that much drop and considering whether to hold on until you get it sorted. I've just bought a Nomad 4 frame to build up and need a new post for it, do you know when the option will be available?
Joined
·
380 Posts
The SC low shock is the only frame where we've seen an issue. On that bike the housing exits the tube-in-tube 1-3" from the bottom of the post. Normally the 4mm is easily achieved with the tiniest bit of slack housing (even when the housing is clamped further away). We are actually double checking the Nomad 4 because we've have a bunch of people tell us it's fine. The Bronson and Megatower are definitely troublesome so we assumed the Nomad 4 too. I'll update here and online once we've confirmed.
Joined
·
9,770 Posts
FWIW: When WolfTooth came out with their cable remote conversion for the Reverb, which also uses the housing displacement, I mentioned to them that many SC CF frames would be a problem due to the way SC's internal dropper cable guide tube would constrain the housing/cable. They said they were sure it wouldn't be a problem.
Joined
·
5,613 Posts
Hopefully, there's a fix for the SC bikes. I was planning on replacing the stock Reverb on my Megatower with a 210mm OneUp post.
Thanks for the information, is it possible to get a rough ETA for the retrofitable solution?
If I remember correctly for the MT thread you'll be on an XXL. As the distance from the exit of the tube in tube to the actuator of the post might be longer due to the length of the seat tube you might get enough slack to make it worth, might (even getting some slack in the housing might not solve the issue). Hopefully OU can get a working retrofitable solution out soon as a 210mm post on a XXL MT sounds great.
Thanks for explaining it. It's the Nomad 4 CC frame in XL that i have that i'm looking to get the dropper for, if you are able to confirm if it would work it would be much appreciated.
I want to know about the actuation in the V2 as well. I Just got a V1 post and honestly it actuates like trash compared to other droppers. The slack in the lever during use feels low quality. The whole point of housing is for the low friction movement of the cable within, not to move the housing.
Joined
·
9,770 Posts
It's all relative. If the housing isn't constrained such that the post end of the housing can move 4mm freely, there's no difference between thinking it's the cable moving in the housing or the housing moving on the cable, and low friction smooth movement between the housing and cable will have the same beneficial effect.
Joined
·
42,023 Posts
Let me get this straight, you are advocating moving the housing vs. the cable? The housing goes through all sorts of ports, bends and touches the frame in multiple spots. This makes no sense at all if you are saying it's the same thing. The housing is there to allow the inner cable to move due to these realities.
yep, housing actuation is just poor engineering.
Joined
·
9,770 Posts
I'm not advocating anything. I'm describing how it works. Only the end of the housing at the post needs be able to move those mm and it is in most all cases. In those situations there's no difference between whether the cable or housing is doing the actuation. There're a few installations where that end of the housing isn't free to move, and those are the problem.
What needs to be remembered is that a housing a cable work in opposition to transfer motion and force.
What needs to be remembered is that a housing a cable work in opposition to transfer motion and force.
The slack in my remote dropper until I sit on my post tells me the difference. Other posts don’t exhibit this when using cable actuation because housing holds static tension. I was able to have a slack free, less forceful operation with cable actuated droppers.
Unless I'm not understanding how this post works... if only the housing at the post end needs to move (as you say) unless it's stretching somehow, all of the housing has to move.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
1 - 20 of 675 Posts
