I confess that I was a little surprised to learn that OneUp was doing a serious redesign of their successful and well-priced dropper post. It's a product that already led the market in several categories, including longest drop, shortest stack and inserted length, and shortest overall length for a given drop. When you add easy serviceability, excellent reliability and solid performance, you have to wonder why OneUp would go to all this trouble. To my mind, the OneUp V2 Dropper is a post that ain't broke, so why fix it?

I shouldn't say that quite so equivocally. I own a V2 post that has had a little more rotational play than I'd like since new but that's about the only criticism I can lay at a product I have abused for years.

I was however, willing to give the new one a try - a 240 drop that I kept at full length - to see just what OneUp was getting at. To answer Andrew's question, the drop of the longest dropper I know of is quick and positive. I wouldn't want it any faster but it's not so abrupt that an accidental deployment is going to blow you out of the cockpit. I'd call it a little on the fast side of just right, which sounds like the sweet spot out of the box.

I had questions however, so I enlisted the gent who is known for his clever problem solving and excellent exucution; OneUp Head of Product, CTO and co-founder Jon Staples (pictured above).

Cam McRae - I have to confess Jon, I'm a little surprised you've reworked your dropper considering how well-received the V2 has been. Why did you want to fix it when it wasn't broke?

Jon Staples - While I agree the V2 certainly isn't broken, after 5 years in service we had a very good idea of where there was room for improvement. But we'll still take care of our V2 owners. No matter where you bought a V2, or any OneUp product, if you contact [email protected] we'll take care of you. We're also introducing an SKF Seal upgrade for the V2 dropper and we'll continue to offer replacement parts for V2 for at least another 5 years. Our policy is to get customers up and riding again in the minimum possible time. Our customer service team have a massive database of customer feedback. This helps guide how we improve our products. 

Obviously you did a little of everything. What were your most important goals?

Overall the goals of the V3 were to offer significantly improved smoothness of operation and decreased weight, while also lowering maintenance and keeping the price super competitive. It has to be something we'd buy with our own money. I think the press release sums it up nicely with the tagline "Simply, the best". If customers see V3 and think "why would I buy anything else?" then I'd be Stoked!

Looking at the weights and comparing various sizes, I noticed that the 240 in 34.9 is 200 grams heavier than the 30.9. Where is that 200 grams? Is it aluminum wall-thickness?

Yes. The added weight is from the increased wall thickness of the lower tube. We opted to make our 34.9mm post using all the same internals and upper tube as the 30.9 and 31.6.  As such the only difference on that post is the thicker lower tube but service parts are identical across all sizes. For people with 34.9mm bikes it is totally fine to use a 30.9 to 34.9 or 31.6 to 34.9mm with a shim to save significant weight. The 26mm OD upper tube we use on all sizes of post has no trouble passing testing, even at the 210 and 240mm lengths. We could make a dedicated, larger OD 34.9 dropper, but it would still be heavier than running a shimmed 31.6 or 30.9 (if you're concerned about weight) and would be more expensive.

So, to be clear, you wouldn't discourage riders from using a 30.9 and a shim, as I am doing currently?

No, I would not discourage doing this.

It's clear a chunk of weight came out of the clamp and the new cartridge. Where else did you save grams?

There are a few other places.

- All the upper tubes have oval ID profiles (thicker front and rear) this saves 10-15g. 90-180mm use one profile while the 210mm and 240mm have their own dedicated profiles. On the V2 I was limited on the 240 drop by the 20mm OD of the V2 cartridge. By reducing the cartridge OD I was able to use an oval ID profile to make the upper tube lighter and stiffer. 

- The Lower tube ID is larger on V3 than it was on V2, not by much but in addition to saving weight it allows better clearance between the upper and lower tubes and much better resistance to seat collar clamping torque

- Every other part was evaluated to remove whatever weight I could. A few grams on each part adds up! For instance the V3 actuator saved 6g and to me that's worth the tooling cost.

You have gone to a sealed cartridge with no air valve to adjust the return speed. What was the rationale for this change?

The V2 was air filled and designed to run at pressures achievable by a standard shock pump. As such, the diameter needed to be large enough to get decent return speed and force from 300psi. The OD of the V2 cartridge was also very close to the ID of the upper tube on V2 (as noted above) which limited the ID profiling that was possible. The V3 cartridge, in contrast, runs higher pressure and is factory nitrogen filled (more on that later). The higher pressure allows a smaller diameter piston to achieve our desired return speed and force as well as giving us more freedom to extend the top of the cartridge further into the upper tube (saves upper tube weight).

The V2 cartridge was a twin tube system so it could be shorter and fatter but carried more oil and aluminum making it heavier. The V3 is longer because the Nitrogen chamber is inline with the oil chamber. This saved significant cartridge weight but required a longer body.

The single biggest source of a refillable cartridge losing pressure comes from the schrader valve itself, especially when running pressures at or close to 300psi (as most droppers do). Air is also more prone to leak out than pure Nitrogen. By removing the fill valve, filling with Nitrogen and removing any threaded end caps (threads can sometimes nick orings during assembly) we've designed a cartridge that never needs to be filled.  On a side note, adjustable pressures may seem like a good idea but in reality 300psi is typically just enough to make a post function properly with a 20mm OD cartridge.  Dropping to 240 or 250psi runs a real risk of making the post lethargic and/or having it fail to top out.

The system is designed to maintain pressure for years.  If it ever does require replacement the process takes 5 minutes using a 14mm wrench, 5mm hex and 2mm hex (or an EDC tool). For the average customer that is a much more friendly undertaking than a rebuild that would take a qualified mechanic a few hours or that requires you to mail the post to a service center. The cartridge structure is also 98% pure aluminum, uses a relatively low volume of oil and can be rendered inert with our recommended puncture/recycling procedure.

Lastly, I want to note that the cartridge is 100% designed at OneUp. Everything from the piston shape and valve design to the oil and Nitrogen charge was developed over the course of 18 months to achieve exactly the performance we wanted. This is not the Wintec style off-the-shelf-solution that is seen in many of our competitors.

Does OneUp intend to pursue a wireless dropper post? What are your thoughts on that? If it isn't in the plan can you tell me why?

Wireless is something I'm currently investigating but for it to move forward we'd need to do something that is a departure from the offerings that are currently on the market. Even then I'm not sure it's for everyone.

Outside of having a battery to remember to charge, I think wireless drivetrains do offer some advantages over mechanical systems in strength and precision.  Wireless droppers, on the other hand, increase stack and total length significantly thereby limiting the amount of drop that a given person can run.  For me, that's just not a tradeoff I think is reasonable.  

Not to mention the added cost of of a wireless system. and the fact that the actuation is binary and therefore doesn't give the rider an ability to fine tune the height while the valve is half open.

Of the improvements you've made to the V3 dropper, if you had to choose one you and your team are most proud of, what would it be?

Weight.  It is the lightest infinitly adjustable post on the market (compared travel to travel). It's also lighter than all but the most boutique, carbon, two position posts.

Runner up would be the simplicity of the tear down.  I can turn it into a pile of subcomponents in 2-3 minutes using just an EDC tool.

Thanks Jon!

You an check the post at OneUpComponents.com