# "Moar drop!" Please explain.



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

I have three mountain bikes: FS, hardtail, and fat.

All three have 125mm droppers.

I can, with relative ease, _brrrrrrt _my nether regions on the tire on all three of these bikes if things get steep and I need to get low.

Given that I can do this with 125mm of drop, of what value then is having yet more drop?

The limiter is where the rubber meets the chamois, not how low the saddle can go.

What am I missing?


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

If you’re taller, you want more drop. I have a 170mm and would like a +200mm dropper, but my seat tube is too long at 520mm.


----------



## *OneSpeed* (Oct 18, 2013)

mikesee said:


> I have three mountain bikes: FS, hardtail, and fat.
> 
> All three have 125mm droppers.
> 
> ...


I thought the same thing, till I rode a longer dropper. Try it and find out. 

I'm 6'3" so have a higher than average center of gravity. I never knew what it was like to properly lean a bike over in a turn till droppers came along for me. The more drop, the lower I can get my whole body. I also appreciate it on jumps and for pumping sometimes. 

It's not just about steeps.


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

Shrug. Both my bikes have OneUp 210's. I very much enjoy the ability to put the seat between my knees. I know I don't NEED that, but I like it. Like, A lot.
What you might be missing is having never experienced the seat basically being _at_ tire level. You never have to get back "up" over the tail of the seat.









FOR ME- one super underrated benefit of a LOOOOW standover and a long dopper is the ability to slam the post and 'sit on it' with both feet flat on the ground and my knees bent while at rest stops.


----------



## *OneSpeed* (Oct 18, 2013)

Impetus said:


> FOR ME- one super underrated benefit of a LOOOOW standover and a long dopper is the ability to slam the post and 'sit on it' with both feet flat on the ground and my knees bent while at rest stops.


That's funny and awesome.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

pretty sure it's mostly just stupid tall people driving the longer droppers.

I've never been able to fit more than 130mm of drop in a frame I've owned. There are probably some that would allow me to fit more, but I don't care to get my nuts jammed between my seat and the back tire again.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Impetus said:


> FOR ME- one super underrated benefit of a LOOOOW standover and a long dopper is the ability to slam the post and 'sit on it' with both feet flat on the ground and my knees bent while at rest stops.


Same here!!! That's the honest-to-god primary reason I switched out my 125mm dropper to a 150mm.


----------



## bikedrd (Jul 8, 2004)

I'm 5' 9" and love my 210! For super steep DH, but mostly jumping, I like having the seat out of the way to move the bike around.


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

*OneSpeed* said:


> I'm 6'3" so have a higher than average center of gravity. I never knew what it was like to properly lean a bike over in a turn till droppers came along for me. The more drop, the lower I can get my whole body…
> It's not just about steeps.


Ya, significantly better cornering is one of the greatest benifits of a longer dropper. I don’t think that just helps tall guys either as many shorter riders opt for longer droppers as well.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

singletrackmack said:


> Ya, significantly better cornering is one of the greatest benifits of a longer dropper. I don’t think that just helps tall guys either as many shorter riders opt for longer droppers as well.


you can't opt for longer if it physically won't fit. shorter riders are going to have much more trouble with fitting a longer dropper. it's not going to work with a lot of frames.


----------



## Streetdoctor (Oct 14, 2011)

mikesee said:


> I have three mountain bikes: FS, hardtail, and fat.
> 
> All three have 125mm droppers.
> 
> ...


Aren’t you like 5’6? And don’t you ride bikes with funky (old) geometry? Step into this decade…  I’ll keep my 175mm droppers thank you!


----------



## r-rocket (Jun 23, 2014)

Maybe more room to clear swollen balls after too many _brrrrrrt's _to their nether regions?


----------



## ocnLogan (Aug 15, 2018)

Also, adding that the steeper the seat tube angle, the more a longer dropper is needed. Simply because it intrudes more into the riders space than a slack seat tube angle. When standing on a slack STA, often you're fairly in front of the seat. With the steeper STA's, the saddle is more in the way without a dropper.

I'm building up a Banshee Titan right now, and I'm wishing I could have had a bit more drop. A 210mm post would have fit if I shimmed it, but if I went back to longer cranks, it wouldn't have worked, so I went with a 180mm just to be safe. I'm also of the pretty long leg group (36.5in pedal to saddle distance), so that probably affects my desires too.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Funny how many of the responses are bordering on personal attacks, or don't really answer the question.

I have owned 150mm posts. Can't say I noticed any real benefits over 125's.

No one's trying to take anything away from anyone.

I'm just trying to understand something that at face value doesn't add up.


----------



## wschruba (Apr 13, 2012)

Harold said:


> you can't opt for longer if it physically won't fit. shorter riders are going to have much more trouble with fitting a longer dropper. it's not going to work with a lot of frames.


Right here. I'm not particularly short for my inseam, but every bicycle that I've ridden/owned would max out at maybe 140mm before the dropper hits some obstacle in the frame.

The bike would have to be designed specifically to avoid that, and I cannot--frankly--see why I would want to give up a) a second water bottle, or b) compromise on the suspension design.


----------



## Blatant (Apr 13, 2005)

mikesee said:


> Funny how many of the responses are bordering on personal attacks, or don't really answer the question.


Not personal. You’re just not tall and/or leggy enough to appreciate it. Nothing to see here …


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Blatant said:


> Not personal. You’re just not tall and/or leggy enough to appreciate it. Nothing to see here …


I think this ⬆ is it.
I'm taller and don't buzz my gizmo even with a 210mm dropper.
=sParty


----------



## nya (Oct 22, 2011)

I can buzz the nether regions with seat high, it is not about going back on the rear wheel us much having room to go to all kind of directions.


----------



## EatsDirt (Jan 20, 2014)

mikesee said:


> I have three mountain bikes: FS, hardtail, and fat.
> 
> All three have 125mm droppers.
> 
> ...


Realistically, I can easily brrrrrt with a 100mm or less dropper… at an average height/inseam and being a huge fan of 210mm. It’s not all about being behind the seat.

An even lower saddle allows for more room for body English, less contact with knees/inner thighs at high lean angles… becoming even more important riding things like steep chunky corners, passenger style shoots to catch berms, etc. Also a bonus, having more room while centered for compressions etc. Then there’s jumping.

But I’ve mentioned all this before and you didn’t seem to accept any of these benefits.

Edit: yea, what nya said.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

EatsDirt said:


> *But I’ve mentioned all this before and you didn’t seem to accept any of these benefits.*



Possibly (as I've mentioned before) because I don't notice any of these benefits when I go from 125 to 150? 

For that matter, when I limit my drop to 100mm (like when I have a big seatbag on an overnighter) I can't say that there's _that_ big of a difference. I can still move around the bike just fine. I daresay I could go back to 100mm and be just fine with it.

Some responses in this thread seem to be more than a teeny bit defensive. And some are not.

I'm not coming for anyone's guns. You get to keep whatever you have -- or buy a 250mm if it suits you. Go nuts.

I'm trying to understand something that really perplexes me. And finding that some of the answers are more perplexing than the original question.

Go figure.


----------



## Christopher Robin (Dec 1, 2004)

I have a 150mm dropper and never thought I needed more. I'm perfectly happy with it. I have a 33 or 34 inseam and just under 5'11 tall. 

I've noticed that seats are now going lower on enduro bikes than they are on full DH bikes.


----------



## EatsDirt (Jan 20, 2014)

mikesee said:


> Possibly (as I've mentioned before) because I don't notice any of these benefits when I go from 125 to 150?
> 
> For that matter, when I limit my drop to 100mm (like when I have a big seatbag on an overnighter) I can't say that there's _that_ big of a difference. I can still move around the bike just fine. I daresay I could go back to 100mm and be just fine with it.
> 
> ...


Might be a tone of arrogance your posts frequently carry. This can’t be news to you… can it?

You must be aware that there are different riding styles, various demands of diverse challenging terrain types, and personal preference. Or, you can just write the whole long dropper thing off as a fad for no talent sheeple.


----------



## nhodge (Jul 6, 2004)

mikesee said:


> Funny how many of the responses are bordering on personal attacks, or don't really answer the question.
> 
> I have owned 150mm posts. Can't say I noticed any real benefits over 125's.
> 
> ...


Why continue to think about it? You've found your dropper Nirvana. Kind of a FORREST GUMP moment. One less thing to think about


----------



## slimat99 (May 21, 2008)

125mm? What is this 2009? Get with the times you luddite.


----------



## evdog (Mar 18, 2007)

mikesee said:


> Funny how many of the responses are bordering on personal attacks, or don't really answer the question.


Have you forgotten which forum you're on?  Just be thankful all the responses haven't been the super useful MTBR staple "I use ___, and I love it!" with no attempt or apparent ability to elaborate why. 

Seems like this is just another cycle of _if the industry keeps making it bigger, riders will buy it and proclaim it to be the best thing ever even if it isn't._ 

Remember 810+mm bars? Riders were all over the wide bar trend for awhile (so much more control, the leverage really helps me climb, etc) Almost everyone I know who was talking them up has gone back to 760-780 bars. Same with plus size tires. For a year or so 3.0 was the best thing ever (traction, float, so much more fun, best of both worlds etc). Now a lot of riders have settled on 2.6 as optimum. That was just a repeat of DH riders from early 2000s with their 3.0 Gazzalodi's. By the mid 2000s most of them were on 2.5s. The extremes work best for a few people but are seldom best for most, given time to experience and weigh the pros and cons. Other trends like super slack head angles and low BBs will hopefully moderate as well. I'm sure a few forum members are feverishly typing away to tell me how wrong I am. We'll see in a few years. 

FWIW I am one of those whose bike can only fit a 125 or 150mm dropper. 125mm leaves me wanting a bit more on the steepest steeps and for jumps, otherwise either works. Anyone remember the RASE Black Mamba post? I had a small size heckler in the mid 2000s and put a RASE on it. That bike could somehow utilize the full dropper travel of 9 inches while shrugging off all the jokes that came with it. The bike felt super awkward to ride with the seat that slammed all the way down since I couldn't really use my legs to hug the seat for balance or control. I finally set the limit so it couldn't drop more than 7", and I didn't use that much very often. I think most riders will eventually settle on 125-170mm depending on the terrain they ride and how honest they are about what they really need. The "truth" would become more clear, sooner, if component makers charged more for posts with more drop. lol


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

In my experience, you get diminishing returns as you go longer and longer. There is a min drop that I like, around 125, but as you start going the other way, more than 125, I find that the benefits start to decrease after a while. While 125 is my "min", it's not what I run on all the bikes or where I feel the benefits start decreasing, it's just the lowest I'm willing to go where I'll run a dropper.

When you start going longer and loner, you _think_ it's helping...but it's not really helping IME. You get "used to it" and that seems to be the bigger effect IME. 210mm or whatever doesn't hurt you in any way, you get used to the position at times, and all of a sudden this is the norm and you "feel" you can't ride with any less than this. Going back to less drop feels awkward and you feel like you are not in control.

When I start getting to the real steep stuff, like the Whistler-slabs type stuff, I have to get my weight back and the seat is up in my chest. It doesn't really even matter much as long as I can get behind it, in other words, going lower really doesn't help all that much when you start getting on that steep of a grade. So again, beyond a certain point, I think it starts to just get silly and not really doing much but making for an extremely long and heavy seatpost with more leverage and possibility of things going wrong. Anywhere around 6" is good for me, 150, 160, 170 going way more than that, like around 8" is overkill IMO.


----------



## abeckstead (Feb 29, 2012)

Got a 200mm on my Tallboy and could probably fit a longer one. But the TB is a XXL and I have a 38” inseam lmao. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Cary (Dec 29, 2003)

ocnLogan said:


> Also, adding that the steeper the seat tube angle, the more a longer dropper is needed. Simply because it intrudes more into the riders space than a slack seat tube angle. When standing on a slack STA, often you're fairly in front of the seat. With the steeper STA's, the saddle is more in the way without a dropper.
> 
> I'm building up a Banshee Titan right now, and I'm wishing I could have had a bit more drop. A 210mm post would have fit if I shimmed it, but if I went back to longer cranks, it wouldn't have worked, so I went with a 180mm just to be safe. I'm also of the pretty long leg group (36.5in pedal to saddle distance), so that probably affects my desires too.


This. 150-160 mm has always been fine for me. My Banshee Prime which has a 77 degree effective seat tube angle and about 75 actual puts the saddle where the widest point of the saddle is between my legs when dropped. I need it to go lower and more forward. I don’t have this issue on my son’s transition, which has the same post and effective angle, but a much slacker actual seat tube angle.


----------



## EatsDirt (Jan 20, 2014)

Jayem said:


> you _think_ it's helping...but it's not really helping IME. You get "used to it"


You means _*you*. _Not me.

I knew immediately on steep trails and jumping that going from 170 to 210 was the best upgrade I've made in a while. Substantial. For ME.

But this is the internet, so obviously I must be doing it wrong.

Double dropped on a 150 post. So glad I don’t have to screw with that anymore.


----------



## nya (Oct 22, 2011)

Jayem said:


> In my experience, you get diminishing returns as you go longer and longer. There is a min drop that I like, around 125, but as you start going the other way, more than 125, I find that the benefits start to decrease after a while. While 125 is my "min", it's not what I run on all the bikes or where I feel the benefits start decreasing, it's just the lowest I'm willing to go where I'll run a dropper.
> 
> When you start going longer and loner, you _think_ it's helping...but it's not really helping IME. You get "used to it" and that seems to be the bigger effect IME. 210mm or whatever doesn't hurt you in any way, you get used to the position at times, and all of a sudden this is the norm and you "feel" you can't ride with any less than this. Going back to less drop feels awkward and you feel like you are not in control.
> 
> When I start getting to the real steep stuff, like the Whistler-slabs type stuff, I have to get my weight back and the seat is up in my chest. It doesn't really even matter much as long as I can get behind it, in other words, going lower really doesn't help all that much when you start getting on that steep of a grade. So again, beyond a certain point, I think it starts to just get silly and not really doing much but making for an extremely long and heavy seatpost with more leverage and possibility of things going wrong. Anywhere around 6" is good for me, 150, 160, 170 going way more than that, like around 8" is overkill IMO.


I went from 150mm to 200mm and the diference was very noticeable straight away. Not as much on steep stuff as stuff when you need to move a lot and the 200mm one gives me way more room to move


----------



## ocnLogan (Aug 15, 2018)

I finished installing the 180mm dropper tonight. Now, I haven't ridden trails with it, but it is at least noticable when dropping the post, that it has 10mm more travel than my Konas 170mm dropper (ie, easy to tell it dropped farther).

We'll see if its an improvement over the 170 when I actually get to ride. But given its an entirely different bike it seems like it would be difficult to know for certain which thing I'm feeling as being "better.

I'm kind of the opinion so far that there is no reason for people not to run as much drop as they can fit onto a given frame for their leg length... at least with dropper posts that we have available now. There very well may be overkill lengths in the future, and maybe even now for shorter people. But so far it doesn't appear we've reached obvious overkill for taller folk yet.


----------



## fuzz_muffin (Dec 24, 2017)

Cos tables look better when you can tuck the saddle in your downside knee pit. Get her cranked full 90*

Tables. Oh and also riding.


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

I get what Mikesee is saying and have always had the same question... if you have a 125mm dropper and it works to get the saddle out of your way, why the obsession with going as long as possible? If you watch YouTube channels (Hardtail Party is a good example of this specifically) you can see just how overly obsessed people are with getting the absolute longest dropper on a bike. Most of the time that guy gets an attitude with a frame before he even rides it, because he can't fit a 200mm dropper. It seems weird. Go ride it and if you can't get the saddle out of your way, get an attitude with it then.

Seat tube angle, rider inseam and a whole bunch of other data points are what's going to dictate how long you need your dropper to be. Most people seem to jump on the "longer is better" bandwagon right out of the gate though.


----------



## blaklabl (Mar 14, 2011)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> If you watch YouTube channels (Hardtail Party is a good example of this specifically) you can see just how overly obsessed people are with getting the absolute longest dropper on a bike. Most of the time that guy gets an attitude with a frame before he even rides it, because he can't fit a 200mm dropper. It seems weird.


Especially since he's about 5'2". 

I run a 160mm dropper on my HT, but honestly I could easily do with the 125mm I replaced. I have noticed zero difference going to longer, except for a lighter wallet. In fact, if I was going to go back and get the Reverb AXS again for this frame, I would have had to go 125mm due to the length and I was ok with that, except I decided not to go down that road again due to my first experience with it (failed after 40 miles). Love my BY Revive dropper.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

blaklabl said:


> Especially since he's about 5'2".


After reading this thread I've come to the conclusion there's a disconnect between shorter riders and taller riders about understanding disparate dropper length needs.
Maybe taller riders just need lots more room to move around on the bike?
I sure do.
I want that seat GONE.
I have a 185mm dropper and three 210mm droppers.
Sometimes I go to drop the 185mm dropper only to realize it's already down.
=sParty


----------



## 93EXCivic (Mar 12, 2018)

I basically always will want less standover and more drop. It just makes a bike feel a bit more BMX-ish.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

Why do people run a ridiculous 50t cassette? I don't need it, so clearly, nobody else should either.

Same argument.

I run the longest post I can, and I can tell the difference. I can only get 160 on my bike, shimmed to 155. Worst thing about my XC bike is the 100mm post. I already had a lightweight post so I used it instead of paying for a longer, lightweight post.


----------



## *OneSpeed* (Oct 18, 2013)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> I get what Mikesee is saying and have always had the same question... if you have a 125mm dropper and it works to get the saddle out of your way, why the obsession with going as long as possible? If you watch YouTube channels (Hardtail Party is a good example of this specifically) you can see just how overly obsessed people are with getting the absolute longest dropper on a bike. Most of the time that guy gets an attitude with a frame before he even rides it, because he can't fit a 200mm dropper. It seems weird. Go ride it and if you can't get the saddle out of your way, get an attitude with it then.
> 
> Seat tube angle, rider inseam and a whole bunch of other data points are what's going to dictate how long you need your dropper to be. Most people seem to jump on the "longer is better" bandwagon right out of the gate though.


What's the downside to a longer dropper?

I agree with you about HTP, he has super short legs I think and his sizing requirements are somewhat unique. I don't know how many people factor that in when they watch his videos. It has potential implications because he will ride the "wrong size" of a certain bike just to hit one or two specific parameters instead of choosing the 'properly' sized bike. Either way has compromises I suppose but whatever. It's hard to say how the inconsistency of different size frames that he reviews impacts his impression of the product, and ultimately how viewers perceive said product? If he's 5'7" or whatever you could make a good argument for always riding a Medium and dealing with the compromises. That could be more relevant data to the public? (though less fun for him probably)

People with either very short of very long inseams have it tough. I have a buddy that's 6'7" with a massive inseam. He recently built up a modern aggressive hardtail, size XL (too small), and the seattube was short for lower standover. I recommended the Bikeyoke 213mm dropper and it's in the frame only to the minimum insertion line. Only 4" of post are in the frame, the whole rest of it is jacked way up in the air.

He's a perfect candidate for a 250mm dropper.


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

*OneSpeed* said:


> What's the downside to a longer dropper?
> 
> I agree with you about HTP, he has super short legs I think and his sizing requirements are somewhat unique. I don't know how many people factor that in when they watch his videos. It has potential implications because he will ride the "wrong size" of a certain bike just to hit one or two specific parameters instead of choosing the 'properly' sized bike. Either way has compromises I suppose but whatever. It's hard to say how the inconsistency of different size frames that he reviews impacts his impression of the product, and ultimately how viewers perceive said product? If he's 5'8" or whatever you could make a good argument for always riding a Medium and dealing with the compromises. That could be more relevant data to the public? (though less fun for him probably)
> 
> ...


I'm not saying there's anything wrong with running a longer dropper than you need. Im just commenting on people's obsession with making sure they have the absolute longest dropper necessary, and forming opinions on bikes/frames before they'd even ridden it. Seems to happen a lot. I've had frames that I wished could run longer droppers, and I have had frames that I ultimately ended up putting a shorter dropper on because I liked the bottom out position of a certain size vs the longest one that would fit. I rode all of those bikes before forming an opinion though... I guess is what it boils down to. Saying "this frame won't fit a 180mm dropper, it's outdated and I am no longer considering it" seems crazy.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

*OneSpeed* said:


> I have a buddy that's 6'7" with a massive inseam.


I gotta take a look at Reggie Miller's bike next time I see him, see what he is running.


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

*OneSpeed* said:


> People with either very short of very long inseams have it tough. I have a buddy that's 6'7" with a massive inseam. He recently built up a modern aggressive hardtail, size XL (too small), and the seattube was short for lower standover. I recommended the Bikeyoke 213mm dropper and it's in the frame only to the minimum insertion line. Only 4" of post are in the frame, the whole rest of it is jacked way up in the air.
> 
> He's a perfect candidate for a 250mm dropper.



A guy I ride with a lot is 6'5" or 6'6" with I'd guess probably a 39" inseam and rides an S6 (XXL) Stumpjumper Evo, with a 210 mm dropper. He's in the same boat. You can see the minimum insertion line at the seat collar notch. I'm 5' 9", and I had to drop his post probably 2/3 of the way down to even reach the pedals on his bike. It was riding with an 80mm dropper.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

One downside to having a longer dropper is that your rear tire might brrrrt the saddle under compression, depending upon the frame of course.


----------



## slimat99 (May 21, 2008)

abeckstead said:


> Got a 200mm on my Tallboy and could probably fit a longer one. But the TB is a XXL and I have a 38” inseam lmao.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


It's short inseams that need more drop. I'm not saying you won't benefit from a slammed saddle, but it's a popular misconception that tall people need more than short people. Ironically it's the xl frames that accept longer droppers when it's small frames that really need it. I won't buy a frame that won't take a 210 and I'm a size M. Yeah, my options are limited. The bike industry needs to get their shi! together and design all size S and M frames for a minimum of 200mm drop.


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

mikesee said:


> I have three mountain bikes: FS, hardtail, and fat.
> 
> All three have 125mm droppers.
> 
> ...


I guess, to directly answer the question:

I want more drop because a longer drop allows me to get my CoG lower _without_ resorting to getting back over the tire enough to, as you put it "_brrrrrrt _my nether regions on the tire".

If you can't get lower, you get back. With a super low seat, I can get LOW and not need to get back. Yes, I realize that "some" moves require you to get that far back, but there's plenty more where low and centered is unarguably better. That isnt happening without the extra 75mm of drop between a 125 and 200.


----------



## slimat99 (May 21, 2008)

Nat said:


> One downside to having a longer dropper is that your rear tire might brrrrt the saddle under compression, depending upon the frame of course.


I had this issue before droppers. It's really a poorly designed frame issue. My transition dirt bag bent a saddle rail at bottom out once. WTB makes a saddle with a cut out for the few poorly designed frames out there that might make contact with a slammed saddle.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Impetus said:


> I guess, to directly answer the question:
> 
> I want more drop because a longer drop allows me to get my CoG lower _without_ resorting to getting back over the tire enough to, as you put it "_brrrrrrt _my nether regions on the tire".
> 
> If you can't get lower, you get back. With a super low seat, I can get LOW and not need to get back. Yes, I realize that "some" moves require you to get that far back, but there's plenty more where low and centered is unarguably better. That isnt happening without the extra 75mm of drop between a 125 and 200.


Well stated.
Maybe this is why I rarely buzz my buns — most often I stay closer to the middle of the bike.
Typically when I’m going down something vertical, my bike & I are in the air and my bike remains closer to horizontal. 
=sParty


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

I am 5'7" and have run droppers in a range of sizes. From 63mm, 80mm, 100 mm, 125mm, 150mm, and 185 mm. There is a dropper that is "Too short" and a dropper that is "longer than needed". My 63 was on an XC bike and was good, but left me wanting more. At the time I had a 125 on my trailbike and felt that was good. The 63 was a compromise to get a light weight post and was much better than nothing, but on really steep tech was an issue. I needed more seat post extension (for optimum pedaling) and moved to 80mm XC style light post and that was darn good. Pretty much all the drop I need on an XC bike and not too much effort to lower. I had found that on a longer drop post it takes more effort and time to drop the post all the way down so I often did not even do that unless I really needed it. I then picked up an Enduro bike with 185 dropper. Again I went that long because I needed the long extension for seat post height. I am only 5'7", but tend to run lots of seat post (I am about 29" from center of the cranks to the top of my seat). The 185 was cool, but I rarely dropped it all the way down. Somewhere in between was much better as I did not need the full drop to get room in most cases. I did use it all for really techy stuff however. Along the way I swapped my 80mm for a 100mm light weight post on my XC Singlespeed and that seems like all the drop I ever need for that bike. With the seat down it never gets in the way an I can move freely. Even in enough tech I want to take that bike on. I swapped my 185 dropper on my enduro bike for 150 drop for complicated reasons and though I was going to miss that 35mm of drop. Well I don't with the seal all the way down when riding it feels the same as my 185. Seat is just out of the way even in nasty steep techy rollers and drops. 

This tells me at some point the seat is just far enough out of the way that you don't notice it. That can be 100 to 150 mm or maybe 175 for some guys. When you get to that level more drop does not do much. It is just for "cool factor". Someone here made a comparison to bar width and think that is fair. Bars used to be too narrow for sure. So as they got wider it was better. But then they got stupid wide and are starting to come back into a wide, but reasonable range. I think the same will happen for dropper length. Riders will at some point realize that 300mm of saddle drop is not more useful than 150.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

slimat99 said:


> the bike industry needs to get their shi! together and design all size S and M frames for a minimum of 200mm drop.



It's reading this sort of thing that prompted the question to begin with.

You have to make soooooo many other compromises to get that much drop.

And -- at least within this thread -- there seems to be consensus (not actual proof) that not everyone needs or wants 8" of drop.

So -- in what world would it make sense to force "all" (your word) riders to accept all of those geo compromises in order to get something that they neither want nor need nor could many of them even use?


----------



## Cary (Dec 29, 2003)

*OneSpeed* said:


> What's the downside to a longer dropper?
> 
> I agree with you about HTP, he has super short legs I think and his sizing requirements are somewhat unique. I don't know how many people factor that in when they watch his videos. It has potential implications because he will ride the "wrong size" of a certain bike just to hit one or two specific parameters instead of choosing the 'properly' sized bike. Either way has compromises I suppose but whatever. It's hard to say how the inconsistency of different size frames that he reviews impacts his impression of the product, and ultimately how viewers perceive said product? If he's 5'7" or whatever you could make a good argument for always riding a Medium and dealing with the compromises. That could be more relevant data to the public? (though less fun for him probably)
> 
> ...


He is a good rider, but yes, his recommendations are going to work best for someone his size. He likes super short chainstays, but many don’t realize that the same 420 stay on a bike with 50mm toptube is going to ride completely different.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

slimat99 said:


> I had this issue before droppers. It's really a poorly designed frame issue.


Hunh? There's no way my rear tire would hit my saddle with a rigid post at ride height. Did you mean you dropped your saddle by hand or something?

With a 125mm dropper my rear tire won't rub the saddle even at full compression but with a 150mm dropper it will. Nonetheless, I prefer my 150 since it lets me sit down while resting with my foot flat on the ground. I just make sure to not drop it all the way while I'm riding.


----------



## thatalexguy (Oct 5, 2021)

I have a Fox Transfer 150. Does anybody know if it is internally possible or modifiable to increase the length of the drop?


----------



## slimat99 (May 21, 2008)

mikesee said:


> It's reading this sort of thing that prompted the question to begin with.
> 
> You have to make soooooo many other compromises to get that much drop.
> 
> ...


I should have said not all bikes. Bikes with a DH bias, or play bias should offer the ability to drop to the rails on size M and S frames. IMO, dropping the saddle 8" or more should be a standard feature for all aggressive bikes. It's an easy thing to design in for many suspension designs with no geo compromise. 

You don't see a need for more drop because you're equating butt buzz with saddle interference. THere's a lot more to it like cornering for example. Take notice of how every pro gravity racer moves their butt off center of the rear wheel/saddle during certain cornering situations. The saddle will interfere with the ability to shift weight left and right of center. Another thing that's independent of butt buzz is returning to center when low off the rear on or off center. If the saddle is only dropped to say 150mm you're likely to experience interference. There are other examples but I don't think you really care. It seems you prefer to poke fun at those following kool kid trends. Fair enough, there's no shortage of that in MTB. If you are happy riding your plus bike with 125mm enjoy the ride.


----------



## slimat99 (May 21, 2008)

Nat said:


> Hunh? There's no way my rear tire would hit my saddle with a rigid post at ride height. Did you mean you dropped your saddle by hand or something?
> 
> With a 125mm dropper my rear tire won't rub the saddle even at full compression but with a 150mm dropper it will. Nonetheless, I prefer my 150 since it lets me sit down while resting with my foot flat on the ground. I just make sure to not drop it all the way while I'm riding.


Can't tell if you're serious?


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

thatalexguy said:


> I have a Fox Transfer 150. Does anybody know if it is internally possible or modifiable to increase the length of the drop?


That's another thread.
=sParty


----------



## *OneSpeed* (Oct 18, 2013)

thatalexguy said:


> I have a Fox Transfer 150. Does anybody know if it is internally possible or modifiable to increase the length of the drop?


Yes just take it apart. The instructions are inside.


----------



## Timothy G. Parrish (Apr 13, 2014)

Harold said:


> pretty sure it's mostly just stupid tall people driving the longer droppers.
> 
> I've never been able to fit more than 130mm of drop in a frame I've owned. There are probably some that would allow me to fit more, but I don't care to get my nuts jammed between my seat and the back tire again.


Not necessarily. I was able to fit a 170mm dropper in a 2014 Kona Process 134. It gave me maximum drop, and I don't hit the rear tire at all. I'm only 5' 8" with a 30"-ish inseam. 

Sent from my brain using my hand.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

I had a steel 2013 Kona Honzo that accepted a 210mm OneUp dropper.
Loved that bike.
Still have a 2018 Guerrilla Gravity The Smash that can't take a dropper longer than 185mm.
Crazy.
=sParty


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

thatalexguy said:


> I have a Fox Transfer 150. Does anybody know if it is internally possible or modifiable to increase the length of the drop?


No. You need different length internal and external parts so basically a new post.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

slimat99 said:


> Can't tell if you're serious?


Are you?


----------



## plummet (Jul 8, 2005)

It's about lowering the overall C of G. It becomes of particular use on steep that you need to control speed on. Steep like a rollover that you can let go of the brakes warp the down and re-apply after the rollout isn't as bad. But if you chase long sustained steep that you can't go warp factor 9 on then less seat height is good. It's also a good thing when pumping and jumping and bunny hopping up and over things. Oh, also high speed gnar where bike is smashing around underneath you a big drop allows more room for movement of the bike before you get cockpunched by the seat. 

I had 125 for a long while, then went to 150, and now have 150 and 180mm. I'm 5 11' and find 125 is not enough for me to go from full pedal height to full steep madness. 150 does most standard bike park trails. I love the 180 when I am in the mountains hunting the incredibly sustained steep goat track. 

As others have stated shorter people can only fit shorter droppers. But they are also already riding at a lower C of G. Taller riders are at a henious C of G with their seats at full pedal height. They benefit more from a longer drop.

So...... in conclusion longer droppers are for riders riding more steep and gnar and or taller people with recockulous seat heights.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

plummet said:


> It's about lowering the overall C of G. It becomes of particular use on steep that you need to control speed on. Steep like a rollover that you can let go of the brakes warp the down and re-apply after the rollout isn't as bad. But if you chase long sustained steep that you can't go warp factor 9 on then less seat height is good. It's also a good thing when pumping and jumping and bunny hopping up and over things. Oh, also high speed gnar where bike is smashing around underneath you a big drop allows more room for movement of the bike before you get cockpunched by the seat.
> 
> I had 125 for a long while, then went to 150, and now have 150 and 180mm. I'm 5 11' and find 125 is not enough for me to go from full pedal height to full steep madness. 150 does most standard bike park trails. I love the 180 when I am in the mountains hunting the incredibly sustained steep goat track.
> 
> ...


I believe the correct spelling is redonkulous.
=sParty


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

I'm 6'5" and the biggest issue I noticed is the saddle interfering with my knees. The higher the saddle is from the BB the more interference when you lean the bike, because for the same bike lean angle the more the saddle moves laterally. As dropper length increases the straight line issues are resolved long before the leaning issues. A taller rider doesn't necessarily have more space between their legs for the saddle to move side to side (unless you ride bow legged).


----------



## slimat99 (May 21, 2008)

Nat said:


> Are you?


Now I'm really confused haha.


----------



## LewisQC (Jul 3, 2013)

I'm 6'2'' and my main ride is a Ripmo V1. I only have 160mm of drop on my bike yoke revive dropper because 185s were b.o. when I got my bike. It's fine most of the time but since I've built my hardtail (with a oneup 210mm), I find myself banging my nuts on the seat occasionally (on really technical/steep moves), like if I'm surprised that it's in the way. I guess it's one disadvantage of riding two different bikes. I'm looking from time to time for a 185mm but I really love my Revive and only $$ keeps me from getting a longer one...

My fatbike won't fit longer than 125mm because of a long seat tube and I wish I could go longer. Many rider won't understand why use a dropper on a fatbike but going down fast descent, always looking for traction, I find it way easier with the seat dropped. Also to mount/dismount the bike in soft snow or really narrow area with the seat down is a plus...


----------



## slimat99 (May 21, 2008)

jeremy3220 said:


> I'm 6'5" and the biggest issue I noticed is the saddle interfering with my knees. The higher the saddle is from the BB the more interference when you lean the bike, because for the same bike lean angle the more the saddle moves laterally. As dropper length increases the straight line issues are resolved long before the leaning issues. A taller rider doesn't necessarily have more space between their legs for the saddle to move side to side (unless you ride bow legged).


Just imagine having a shorter inseam. I get all sorts of inner thigh and hamstring interference when moving off center in the corners. 210mm to me would be like 170 or even less to you. This is why I say size M and S frames need to be designed to accept the longest droppers on the market. Just because many won't need or want that much drop doesn't change the fact that the shorter your inseam is, the more drop you need just to match what half the people here call a sensible amount of travel.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

The COG thing is real.
Shorter riders don't know what it's like to suffer a high COG.
For high speed cornering, a low COG is waaaaaay better.
At 6'3" with a 210mm dropper at least I can get low.
=sParty


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

slimat99 said:


> Just imagine having a shorter inseam. I get all sorts of inner thigh and hamstring interference when moving off center in the corners.


I'm not sure what you mean. If I were shorter with the same amount of drop, the dropper would move a greater proportion of my leg length. Imagine for the sake of argument you had two riders, one with a 3ft inseam and the other with 2ft. They're both lucky enough to have a 1ft dropper. The rider with a 2ft inseam can lower the saddle 50% of their leg length. The 3ft inseam rider can only move it down 33%. The taller rider would need a 50% longer dropper to get the same range of movement.


----------



## themaxstanley (Jan 22, 2019)

I'm 6'2" and a 150mm post is too short for me. I was running 150 for a while and had to keep it raised out of the collar about 1" in order to get the seat up high enough to fit. 

Recently switched to 170mm and now i can insert the post all the way into the seat tube, getting full drop down to the collar and a good fit at full extension.


----------



## pcconsult (Sep 21, 2019)

My bike is better!


----------



## evdog (Mar 18, 2007)

mikesee said:


> So -- in what world would it make sense to force "all" (your word) riders to accept all of those geo compromises in order to get something that they neither want nor need nor could many of them even use?


The bike industry is great at shoving changes down our throats that riders don't need or want, or in some cases work against a lot of riders in the name of marketing. Is that bike long, low and slack enough for ya, flat land rider?


----------



## Gumby_rider (Apr 18, 2017)

I had 125mm dropper post on my mtb and it seemed good enough. But Then my son got me into bmx and it didn’t take long to realize that a longer dropper on my mtb would it even more fun so I got a 150mm and it is.


----------



## slimat99 (May 21, 2008)

jeremy3220 said:


> I'm not sure what you mean. If I were shorter with the same amount of drop, the dropper would move a greater proportion of my leg length. Imagine for the sake of argument you had two riders, one with a 3ft inseam and the other with 2ft. They're both lucky enough to have a 1ft dropper. The rider with a 2ft inseam can lower the saddle 50% of their leg length. The 3ft inseam rider can only move it down 33%. The taller rider would need a 50% longer dropper to get the same range of movement.


Think of it this way. A rider with a shorter inseam will experience more rear wheel interference than a rider with a longer inseam. Saddle height is similar. When talking about saddle height and Knee clearance when off center (lateral movement) it's a little less straight forward so I get your take. My overall point is smaller frames need as much or more drop than larger frames for the same reasons smaller people need smaller rear wheels.


----------



## nya (Oct 22, 2011)

slimat99 said:


> Think of it this way. A rider with a shorter inseam will experience more rear wheel interference than a rider with a longer inseam. Saddle height is similar. When talking about saddle height and Knee clearance when off center (lateral movement) it's a little less straight forward so I get your take. My overall point is smaller frames need as much or more drop than larger frames for the same reasons smaller people need smaller rear wheels.


I just don't see it. Leg length more or less defines the maximum possible movements and shorter legs have less thus longer legs need longer dropper to utilise their maximum.


----------



## motojason955 (Jun 28, 2008)

The dropper length is just one factor that has to be considered in a range of other variables: Rider height, inseam length, frame size, seat tube length, and seat tube angle all make a difference. On the same bike for the same rider simply going to a longer dropper may make no difference if the seat is as far out of the way as you would ever want it with the shorter (130) dropper. However, if you get a new bike with a longer reach, lower standover, and steeper STA then a 150 dropper might work better. I'm 5'-9", with just over a 30" inseam, riding a medium-size Alchemy Arktos 29 with a 150 dropper. My Transfer post is almost all the way inserted into the frame. The 150 gives me proper seat height and provides as much range as I can use with my frame. And I probably only use the full 150 drop 15-20% of the time in CO on steep rocky/steppy downhill.


----------



## slimat99 (May 21, 2008)

nya said:


> I just don't see it. Leg length more or less defines the maximum possible movements and shorter legs have less thus longer legs need longer dropper to utilise their maximum.
> [/Q
> 
> Shorter legs have less range of motion so they need the saddle lower. Not sure why this is hard to understand? Just think of a kid. They need the saddle lower than an adult. They need smaller rear wheels than an adult. When talking about adults at 5'8" vs 6'5" it's the same.


----------



## nya (Oct 22, 2011)

they need their seat lower but that has nothing to do with the drop of the seat


----------



## Jack Watts (Jul 29, 2014)

Bottom line, some folks just don't want to be able to feel the saddle at all in some circumstances, and those folks are going to want the most drop possible. Personally, as someone who grew up riding without a dropper, I want to actually be able to feel the saddle as I use it as a rudder of sorts in turns on occasion--and I just feel a bit lost of its totally out of they way. I love having a dropper, but don't want the seat out of the way completely. I can easily buzz me precious bits with a rigid post, since I learned to ride with having the saddle in front of me on the steeps, so there's not benefit to me for more drop in really any situation. 

I went from a 125 to a 150 after a bike change, and I never use the extra travel. I'd be better off with a 125 (lighter post, and probably less bushing wear since there's less leverage on that point). But again, that's me. Some folks do not want to feel the seat at all. And I get those folks wanting more drop. 

I do think drop scales to height, so I will say I do not get the need for a 200mm dropper post on a size small. At that point I'd recommend a trials bike... The average rider on a size small is just not going to use that much drop.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

pcconsult said:


> My bike is better!


yes, you understand!


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

Sparticus said:


> The COG thing is real.
> Shorter riders don't know what it's like to suffer a high COG.
> For high speed cornering, a low COG is waaaaaay better.
> At 6'3" with a 210mm dropper at least I can get low.
> =sParty


Well, we were mansplained what it's like to be over 6' a page or so ago though.. so you know, there's that.

It depends on the bike, and what it's being ridden on, and how IMO. I'm good on a 160 on my hardtail, the 185's ok on my 150mm, but I could see a 210 having a benefit there.


----------



## Entrenador (Oct 8, 2004)

EatsDirt said:


> You means _*you*. _Not me.
> 
> I knew immediately on steep trails and jumping that going from 170 to 210 was the best upgrade I've made in a while. Substantial. For ME.
> 
> ...


Henceforth you shall be knownst as Cliff Craven.


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

slimat99 said:


> Think of it this way. A rider with a shorter inseam will experience more rear wheel interference than a rider with a longer inseam. Saddle height is similar. When talking about saddle height and Knee clearance when off center (lateral movement) it's a little less straight forward so I get your take. My overall point is smaller frames need as much or more drop than larger frames for the same reasons smaller people need smaller rear wheels.


The rear wheel thing is basically a stand over issue. Shorter riders don't need more drop, they need the saddle lower. It's not the same thing. You have to remember how high a taller riders saddle is at pedaling height. Even with 85mm more drop than the dropper on my wife's bike, my saddle is still a few inches higher when dropped.


----------



## slimat99 (May 21, 2008)

jeremy3220 said:


> The rear wheel thing is basically a stand over issue. Shorter riders don't need more drop, they need the saddle lower. It's not the same thing. You have to remember how high a taller riders saddle is at pedaling height. Even with 85mm more drop than the dropper on my wife's bike, my saddle is still a few inches higher when dropped.


I hear that. I've been equating a lower saddle with more drop which isn't apples to apples.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Harold said:


> you can't opt for longer if it physically won't fit. shorter riders are going to have much more trouble with fitting a longer dropper. it's not going to work with a lot of frames.


... and it's our fault you're short?

Longer droppers for taller people, kinda like longer pants, bigger shoes, makes total sense.

For some reason I thought you'd be taller


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

mikesee said:


> Possibly (as I've mentioned before) because I don't notice any of these benefits when I go from 125 to 150?
> 
> For that matter, when I limit my drop to 100mm (like when I have a big seatbag on an overnighter) I can't say that there's _that_ big of a difference. I can still move around the bike just fine. I daresay I could go back to 100mm and be just fine with it.
> 
> ...


It's your bike. Not all bikes are designed for a short dropper, esp a Lenz.

I find slamming my seat 200+ mm dropper gets the seat entirely out of the way for doing drops, technical downhills, etc...

Downhill, trials, DJ, they all slam their seats, so it's not novel. The novel part is having the ability to bring the seat back up to pedaling height with the push of a lever.

Most of the time I ride with my seat up (pedaling) or I use maybe half my total drop capacity

I use my entire drop during most rides and I'm absolutely happy to have a long dropper.

But honestly, asking this question is not about "getting it" so much as not feeling it's necessary. 

It's certainly a thneed.


----------



## rton20s (Aug 27, 2010)

wschruba said:


> Right here. I'm not particularly short for my inseam, but every bicycle that I've ridden/owned would max out at maybe 140mm before the dropper hits some obstacle in the frame.
> 
> The bike would have to be designed specifically to avoid that, and I cannot--frankly--see why I would want to give up a) a second water bottle, or b) compromise on the suspension design.


Horses for courses. On the flip side, I wouldn't change my bikes to accommodate a second water bottle if it meant giving up a longer dropper. 

I come from a BMX/dirt jumping background as a kid and a slammed seat was mandatory. I rode my rigid 29er for years with no dropper (or QR clamp) and could still "_brrrrrrt _my nether regions" if I wanted to get back that far and low. I switched to a just a 105mm dropper on that bike and it greatly increased my ability to maneuver on that bike. 

On my medium Ripley AF I have a 150mm and it gets mostly out of the way. I can see where additional drop would be good for keeping a low CoG and providing even more maneuvering room. I've been looking at a 170mm PNW Loam and 180mm OneUp (the longest I can fit with my saddle height) and will likely make the change to one of them eventually.


----------



## EatsDirt (Jan 20, 2014)

Entrenador said:


> Henceforth you shall be knownst as Cliff Craven.


Well sh!t man, if you’re gonna troll me… at least do it right.

I think ur buddy JM is the Claven here, but cheers to you anyway buddy!


----------



## wschruba (Apr 13, 2012)

rton20s said:


> Horses for courses. On the flip side, I wouldn't change my bikes to accommodate a second water bottle if it meant giving up a longer dropper.
> 
> I come from a BMX/dirt jumping background as a kid and a slammed seat was mandatory. I rode my rigid 29er for years with no dropper (or QR clamp) and could still "_brrrrrrt _my nether regions" if I wanted to get back that far and low. I switched to a just a 105mm dropper on that bike and it greatly increased my ability to maneuver on that bike.
> 
> On my medium Ripley AF I have a 150mm and it gets mostly out of the way. I can see where additional drop would be good for keeping a low CoG and providing even more maneuvering room. I've been looking at a 170mm PNW Loam and 180mm OneUp (the longest I can fit with my saddle height) and will likely make the change to one of them eventually.


Just for the record, that _is_ a compromise I've chosen to make for this particular bike (water bottle mount), or the other (rocker-link suspension). On the full suspension bicycle, it is a cold STOP at 140mm of drop with a Oneup using the low-profile actuator. I will bias towards water bottles almost all the time, due to shoulder injuries that make packs uncomfortable on long rides.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

evdog said:


> The bike industry is great at shoving changes down our throats that riders don't need or want, or in some cases work against a lot of riders in the name of marketing. Is that bike long, low and slack enough for ya, flat land rider?



Good point.

I don't see this (extended length droppers) as being industry driven tho. I feel like there's a vocal minority banging that drum, and the industry is responding primarily out of fear of missing another bus.

I don't know anyone personally on longer than a 150mm dropper. I don't know anyone personally that's asking for one, feels like they need one, or feels like they're missing out without one.

Which is partially why I started this thread.


----------



## nhodge (Jul 6, 2004)

Nurse Ben said:


> It's your bike. Not all bikes are designed for a short dropper, esp a Lenz.
> 
> I find slamming my seat 200+ mm dropper gets the seat entirely out of the way for doing drops, technical downhills, etc...
> 
> ...


Proof reading is a thing


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Nurse Ben said:


> It's your bike. Not all bikes are designed for a short dropper, esp a Lenz.



I have three bikes. One of them is a Lenz.

All three of them could take 150mm. I see no need.

We've ridden together once. On what I consider a pretty technical trail. IIRC, my bike had a 100mm dropper that day.

Do you remember me having difficulty on any of those moves, up or down? Do you remember my 100mm dropper slowing me down in any way?


----------



## fuzz_muffin (Dec 24, 2017)

Man, what's the issue here?

I like drop, currently with 170 but I've had 125 -> 200.
Moar (up to some practically defined point based on mechanical interferences) is better for my riding, end of story.

Why so grumpy?


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

nhodge said:


> Proof reading is a thing


Everyone needs a thneed.


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

mikesee said:


> I don't see this (extended length droppers) as being industry driven tho. I feel like there's a vocal minority banging that drum, and the industry is responding primarily out of fear of missing another bus.
> 
> I don't know anyone personally on longer than a 150mm dropper. I don't know anyone personally that's asking for one, feels like they need one, or feels like they're missing out without one.


Interesting logic. I don't know anyone with a Lamborghini, they must be going out of business. I don't know anyone who needs dialysis, people must not really need it.


----------



## Christopher Robin (Dec 1, 2004)

mikesee said:


> I have three mountain bikes: FS, hardtail, and fat.
> 
> All three have 125mm droppers.
> 
> ...


Don't worry man, I agree with you. 

All these people responding are wrong.


----------



## EatsDirt (Jan 20, 2014)

mikesee said:


> I have three bikes. One of them is a Lenz.
> 
> All three of them could take 150mm. I see no need.
> 
> ...


Are you trying to justify your preferences, or discount those that don't ride what you do?

In the 90's I used to ride a 72* HA bike and would high post trails that currently are promoted by top WC DH pro's for training. Never had difficulty. 100mm is for pu$$ies.


----------



## TraxFactory (Sep 10, 1999)

I remember buying a snowboard from a shop where the owner is like 5'8", the guy absolutely rips (known him for many years). I am 6'4" and eye-balling a 162 all mountain board. He starts telling me that board is so crazy long and what do I need such a long board for, I can ride everything on my 1xx blah blah. To me 162 is short. I find it funny getting that kind of advice from people not living in your shoes.

Like so many things bike, it depends on many things; your riding style, reach, seat angle and definitely the terrain you frequent. I love my 210 and use it all on every ride. There are just a couple of trails I ride that it is extremely steep with several tight turns consecutively. I actually put my seat down slightly more for that run. My bike doesn't work great riding that far in the back seat. So I need the seat out of the way to get my CG low enough to carve the steep wiggle. Its not my ass hitting it but rather inner leg.

So many newer bikes force you to heavily weight the front and I definitely can see the additional drop helpful for specific riders. If your riding that far out the back then ya, might not need it, as long as your nuts clear the saddle your good.

Can I ride everything with a 150, yes. Do I love having that extra 60, absolutely yes. Personally I would like a 220 dropper.


----------



## yzedf (Apr 22, 2014)

Some of it is also your style of riding. If you really like to separate your body from the bike and lean the bike over, the lower the seat is the farther you can lean the bike without adjusting your inside leg. Becomes even more obvious riding clipped in as you can’t roll your foot on the pedal.


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

The saddle is like a limiter on your body's suspension travel.

Practical uses for a maximally slammed saddle:

sucking up the bike, such as when trying to get extra bunnyhop height or trying to absorb a big bump like a tree stump
sitting on saddle when at a stop, with both feet on the ground
extra safety when trying risky stunts, less of a trip hazard when dismounting
increased ease of mounting
less chance of smashing my balls on the back of saddle when returning to a centered position

Rather have my saddle slammage limited by the clearance between saddle and tire, instead of the seat tube. Wish seat tubes were more like 380mm in size medium and were straight enough to allow for long travel dropper. It's such a big deal to me that I'd rather have this feature than a water bottle mounted low inside the front triangle.


----------



## pcconsult (Sep 21, 2019)

Harold said:


> yes, you understand!












This is my custom titanium bike. The frame is made from my drawing by Waltly Titanium. My fork is Manitou Mezzer Pro 180mm. Bottom bracket is BSA83 and crankset is Shimano ZEE FC-M645. Soon will be with 44T oval, Magura MT5 Estop calipers and 220mm rotors. Rear hub is Hope 150 Pro set to 157mm. The full story and free drawing are on my site: Custom titanium bikes


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

pcconsult said:


> This is my custom titanium bike. The frame is made from my drawing by Waltly Titanium. My fork is Manitou Mezzer Pro 180mm. Bottom bracket is BSA83 and crankset is Shimano ZEE FC-M645. Soon will be with 44T oval, Magura MT5 Estop calipers and 220mm rotors. Rear hub is Hope 150 Pro set to 157mm. The full story and free drawing are on my site: Custom titanium bikes


This bike is a little too CUSTOM for me.
=sParty


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Sparticus said:


> This bike is a little too CUSTOM for me.
> =sParty


psh, it's not FULLY CUSTOM, so it looks like there's room for improvement.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Harold said:


> psh, it's not FULLY CUSTOM, so it looks like there's room for improvement.


Ha ha, I guess if it was fully custom, it’d say so, eh. 
=sParty


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Sparticus said:


> Ha ha, I guess if it was fully custom, it’d say so, eh.
> =sParty


zackly.

also, there's no drooper of any kind at all. another area for improvement.


----------



## rton20s (Aug 27, 2010)

wschruba said:


> Just for the record, that _is_ a compromise I've chosen to make for this particular bike (water bottle mount), or the other (rocker-link suspension). On the full suspension bicycle, it is a cold STOP at 140mm of drop with a Oneup using the low-profile actuator. I will bias towards water bottles almost all the time, due to shoulder injuries that make packs uncomfortable on long rides.


Not to get too far off topic, but I ditched my Camelback a while ago for a Venture hip pack from High Above. The pack can be run with one, two or no bottle holders and I've even been able to stash a Hydrapak Stow in the main pocket if I wanted to bring even more water along for the ride. The hip pack is way more comfortable to ride with than any backpack I have used. Using the hip pack and only having a single bottle on the bike with room for a long dropper has been a great compromise for me.


----------



## rton20s (Aug 27, 2010)

Varaxis said:


> Rather have my saddle slammage limited by the clearance between saddle and tire, instead of the seat tube. Wish seat tubes were more like 380mm in size medium and were straight enough to allow for long travel dropper. It's such a big deal to me that I'd rather have this feature than a water bottle mounted low inside the front triangle.


My medium Ibis Ripley AF has a 381mm seat tube with 270mm of insertion length and a water bottle mount low inside the front triangle.


----------



## 93EXCivic (Mar 12, 2018)

mikesee said:


> I don't know anyone personally on longer than a 150mm dropper. I don't know anyone personally that's asking for one, feels like they need one, or feels like they're missing out without one.
> 
> Which is partially why I started this thread.


Cause I enjoy riding a bike with more drop. That is a god enough reason for me.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

93EXCivic said:


> Cause I enjoy riding a bike with more drop. That is a god enough reason for me.



I've never questioned this basic fact. In fact I've asserted support for it right here in this very thread.

So far the takeaways I've gotten from this thread are that taller riders might benefit from more drop, and that some people have a lot of time on their hands, but not enough to actually read and digest a question before answering.


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

mikesee said:


> So far the takeaways I've gotten from this thread are that taller riders might benefit from more drop, and that some people have a lot of time on their hands, but not enough to actually read and digest a question before answering.


Yup…


singletrackmack said:


> If you’re taller, you want more drop…


----------



## Entrenador (Oct 8, 2004)

EatsDirt said:


> Well sh!t man, if you’re gonna troll me… at least do it right.
> 
> I think ur buddy JM is the Claven here, but cheers to you anyway buddy!


Welp, I guess an explanation is in order. See, that looks like a cliff to me that you're dropping off, and Craven sounds kinda like "craving." As in, you have an appetite for gnarly drops and technical terrain that most here wouldn't walk down. So, it was really meant as a compliment. You're welcome.

Who's JM?


----------



## slimat99 (May 21, 2008)

Let's keep it real simple: Moar room to move, moar better


mikesee said:


> I've never questioned this basic fact. In fact I've asserted support for it right here in this very thread.
> 
> So far the takeaways I've gotten from this thread are that taller riders might benefit from more drop, and that some people have a lot of time on their hands, but not enough to actually read and digest a question before answering.


So you still don't get how saddle clearance is independent of wheel clearance? That's your main question and you've been given explanations. My original assumption about you was correct. You really don't care to learn, you just want to poke fun at things you don't need for how you ride.


----------



## 93EXCivic (Mar 12, 2018)

mikesee said:


> I've never questioned this basic fact. In fact I've asserted support for it right here in this very thread.
> 
> So far the takeaways I've gotten from this thread are that taller riders might benefit from more drop, and that some people have a lot of time on their hands, but not enough to actually read and digest a question before answering.


It is pretty clear from your attitude in this entire thread like most of your rant threads is that your way is the only right way and anyone who does it a different way is an idiot.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

slimat99 said:


> Let's keep it real simple: Moar room to move, moar better
> 
> So you still don't get how saddle clearance is independent of wheel clearance?



No, not really -- not beyond a certain point at least.

I'm open to the idea. I started a thread asking people to explain, remember?!

It's really curious how (either) people get really hostile about being asked to explain this, (or) they just seem incapable of explaining it.

From a certain perspective it'd make more sense that shorter people would need more drop. They don't have the wingspan nor the leg length to get the bike very far out from under them, and they're a lot closer to it to begin with.

But it doesn't seem like anyone is advocating that perspective.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

93EXCivic said:


> It is pretty clear from your attitude in this entire thread like most of your rant threads is that your way is the only right way and anyone who does it a different way is an idiot.



Try this perspective on for size: I asked an honest question because I wanted an answer to what is becoming even more of a conundrum. 

A few sort-of-makes-sense answers have been put forward, but none of them are a slam dunk, and there is little to no consensus on even those answers.

Pushing back and asking for clarification do not equal "let's put on the tinfoil hats and declare a conspiracy".

P.S. What's with the people hiding behind inscrutable screen names being the most angry about this?


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

jeremy3220 said:


> Interesting logic. I don't know anyone with a Lamborghini, they must be going out of business. I don't know anyone who needs dialysis, people must not really need it.



You're sooooo close to making a good point, but...

...swing and a miss.

To use your own example, I've _acknowledged_ that there are people out there with Lambo's. 

I'm asking them if they'll explain why they need them.

+ + + + +

I'm a few hours away from stepping off the grid for ~a week.

It'd be lovely to come back and find a clear, concise answer to the original question all wrapped up in a pretty bow when I get back.

I shan't hold my breath.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

There were attempts. Obviously ignored.


----------



## 2021Mach6 (Jan 19, 2021)

Impetus said:


> Shrug. Both my bikes have OneUp 210's. I very much enjoy the ability to put the seat between my knees. I know I don't NEED that, but I like it. Like, A lot.
> What you might be missing is having never experienced the seat basically being _at_ tire level. You never have to get back "up" over the tail of the seat.
> View attachment 1966982
> 
> ...


Bingo! Especially if your doing jumps and riding park, being able to squeeze your knees on the seat has become an essential feature for me. The extra drop isn't for when you're over your tire, but when you're up a little further.

EDIT: And yes, another popular usage, especially at bike parks, really nice to be flat footed and seated comfortably while resting.


----------



## slimat99 (May 21, 2008)

mikesee said:


> No, not really -- not beyond a certain point at least.
> 
> I'm open to the idea. I started a thread asking people to explain, remember?!
> 
> ...


 Your thinking that if the saddle is low enough to allow the rider to experience rear wheel interference then lowering the saddle more is redundant. Your thinking on this is wrong and you have explanations as to why. I see where my logic was off in saying short inseams need more drop and I appreciate the explanations I've been given but this isn't my thread to learn from. This is your thread asking a question you've been given answers to but like I said, you really don't want answers.


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

mikesee said:


> It'd be lovely to come back and find a clear, concise answer to the original question all wrapped up in a pretty bow when I get back.
> 
> I shan't hold my breath.



See post #44. I gave you a clear, concise answer.


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

And you almost understood the context of my comment.

"I don't know anyone personally on longer than a 150mm dropper. I don't know anyone personally that's asking for one, feels like they need one, or feels like they're missing out without one."

Simply put, it's irrelevant what the people you know use.

From Pinkbike.









Much more people prefer 170 and 200mm over sub 150mm droppers. Obviously PB is more skewed towards gravity type riding but it certainly represents a larger demographic than people in your group. If you have recent data to the contrary I'd consider it but bringing up people you know is a weak argument.



https://m.pinkbike.com/news/pinkbike-poll-whats-your-preferred-amount-of-dropper-post-travel.html#:~:text=That%20seemed%20like%20plenty%20of,common%20on%20larger%20frame%20sizes


.



mikesee said:


> You're sooooo close to making a good point, but...
> 
> ...swing and a miss.
> 
> ...


----------



## 2021Mach6 (Jan 19, 2021)

Sparticus said:


> I think this ⬆ is it.
> I'm taller and don't buzz my gizmo even with a 210mm dropper.
> =sParty


Not just tall guys though. I'm only 5'7 and use 175mm .... I think a lotta guys doing XC don't see the point, like the one dude who favors a second bottle. Longer dropper, even for shorter guys like myself is perfect for bike parks and hitting jumps. Not about being able to get over your rear tire, but about having the seat lower when jumping, and as someone else pointed out, being able to put your seat between your knees and also resting flat footed.


----------



## 2021Mach6 (Jan 19, 2021)

EatsDirt said:


> You means _*you*. _Not me.
> 
> I knew immediately on steep trails and jumping that going from 170 to 210 was the best upgrade I've made in a while. Substantial. For ME.
> 
> ...


So sick!


----------



## slimat99 (May 21, 2008)

mikesee said:


> Try this perspective on for size: I asked an honest question because I wanted an answer to what is becoming even more of a conundrum.
> 
> A few sort-of-makes-sense answers have been put forward, but none of them are a slam dunk, and there is little to no consensus on even those answers.
> 
> ...


There is a consensus. Read through your own thread and notice how multiple people talk about saddle interference when cornering which is independent of rear wheel clearance. When you move you body off center in the corners you will experience saddle interference at the knee, inner thigh area. No one has said this isn't fact, multiple people have brought it up. Is that not a consensus to you? Just because a rider hasn't experience this kind of saddle interference doesn't mean it isn't a thing. It's not a thing for you, but now you know. You're welcome. Learning is fun!


----------



## nhodge (Jul 6, 2004)

Do


mikesee said:


> You're sooooo close to making a good point, but...
> 
> ...swing and a miss.
> 
> ...


I thought it was a givein in the world of mtn biking that #need# is not part of the equation x


----------



## 2021Mach6 (Jan 19, 2021)

*OneSpeed* said:


> What's the downside to a longer dropper?
> 
> I agree with you about HTP, he has super short legs I think and his sizing requirements are somewhat unique. I don't know how many people factor that in when they watch his videos. It has potential implications because he will ride the "wrong size" of a certain bike just to hit one or two specific parameters instead of choosing the 'properly' sized bike. Either way has compromises I suppose but whatever. It's hard to say how the inconsistency of different size frames that he reviews impacts his impression of the product, and ultimately how viewers perceive said product? If he's 5'7" or whatever you could make a good argument for always riding a Medium and dealing with the compromises. That could be more relevant data to the public? (though less fun for him probably)
> 
> ...


Who's your friend, Reggie Miller? 

FYI Reggie is an avid rider!


----------



## 2021Mach6 (Jan 19, 2021)

jeremy3220 said:


> I'm 6'5" and the biggest issue I noticed is the saddle interfering with my knees. The higher the saddle is from the BB the more interference when you lean the bike, because for the same bike lean angle the more the saddle moves laterally. As dropper length increases the straight line issues are resolved long before the leaning issues. A taller rider doesn't necessarily have more space between their legs for the saddle to move side to side (unless you ride bow legged).


Good point. Haven't thought of that, but it's the perfect example of how different things suit different people. I'm 5'7 on 175mm drop and I'm opposite of you, I actually prefer my seat at my knees in many situations. Especially jumping, I like having it between my knees, and I'm mostly riding park.


----------



## 2021Mach6 (Jan 19, 2021)

**


Entrenador said:


> Welp, I guess an explanation is in order. See, that looks like a cliff to me that you're dropping off, and Craven sounds kinda like "craving." As in, you have an appetite for gnarly drops and technical terrain that most here wouldn't walk down. So, it was really meant as a compliment. You're welcome.
> 
> Who's JM?


There's a trail at Thunder Bike Park (located a couple hours outside Boston) appropriately banned Cliff Claven!

And I read that post as a compliment too, and figured Cliff made it obvious. You're right about some people not wanting to walk down. Not sure I'd hit that drop. Depends how forgiving the other side is, but I'm guessing it's pretty gnarly!!


----------



## *OneSpeed* (Oct 18, 2013)

Unsubscribing, this one's run its course. 

I don't know that the OP will find an answer that meets his satisfaction and I have no desire to try and explain it any further. All the information that was requested lies here within if you're open to absorbing it. 

In the meantime I'll ride what I like, you ride what you like. I'm going to go ride my bike now. -cheers.


----------



## EatsDirt (Jan 20, 2014)

Entrenador said:


> Welp, I guess an explanation is in order. See, that looks like a cliff to me that you're dropping off, and Craven sounds kinda like "craving." As in, you have an appetite for gnarly drops and technical terrain that most here wouldn't walk down. So, it was really meant as a compliment. You're welcome.
> 
> Who's JM?


Ah, got it... totally read that wrong, and thanks but I'm just an old wanker trying to stay off the couch.

I was referring(replying) to jayem, who tends to like to share his "knowledge" that can occasionally differ from my experience.


----------



## EatsDirt (Jan 20, 2014)

mikesee said:


> I'm open to the idea.


Everything from the title of this thread to the responses you have given say the exact opposite. 

Nope.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

*OneSpeed* said:


> Unsubscribing, this one's run its course.


Same.
=sParty


----------



## slimat99 (May 21, 2008)

Maybe you're a visual learner. Here's a perfect example of what many have been trying to explain to you verbally. You can clearly see how saddle interference happens when the rider shifts off center in the corners. You and your friends don't use movements like this so you don't get it. Now you should get it. There is zero ambiguity on this, and a 100% consensus amongst those here that have brought this point up.

Spinning with flat pedals? – Lee Likes Bikes


----------



## 93EXCivic (Mar 12, 2018)

mikesee said:


> Try this perspective on for size: I asked an honest question because I wanted an answer to what is becoming even more of a conundrum.
> 
> A few sort-of-makes-sense answers have been put forward, but none of them are a slam dunk, and there is little to no consensus on even those answers.
> 
> Pushing back and asking for clarification do not equal "let's put on the tinfoil hats and declare a conspiracy".


An honest answer is I enjoy it more. It makes the bike feel more BMXish and I like that. I am sorry that isn't an acceptable answer for you.


----------



## yzedf (Apr 22, 2014)

2021Mach6 said:


> **
> 
> There's a trail at Thunder Bike Park (located a couple hours outside Boston) appropriately banned Cliff Claven!
> 
> And I read that post as a compliment too, and figured Cliff made it obvious. You're right about some people not wanting to walk down. Not sure I'd hit that drop. Depends how forgiving the other side is, but I'm guessing it's pretty gnarly!!


It’s pretty easy now that they cleaned up the run out a bit. You can actually roll it with just a tug on the bars once your a bike length into it.


----------



## 2021Mach6 (Jan 19, 2021)

yzedf said:


> It’s pretty easy now that they cleaned up the run out a bit. You can actually roll it with just a tug on the bars once your a bike length into it.


So much fun! Absolutely love that park ... Already excited for them to open this season!


----------



## dr.welby (Jan 6, 2004)

Impetus said:


> If you can't get lower, you get back. With a super low seat, I can get LOW and not need to get back.


Ding ding, we have a winner.

In really progressive bikes with mammoth front centers* you don't do "chair pose" to try to get your COG back and behind the tipping point line.










You get your COG down low and forwards to keep the weight distribution between the wheels balanced, and avoid endoing by getting your COG _below_ the tipping point line. You're driving your torso forwards toward your front knee and staying centered.










Moving forwards also makes the standover (sitover?) tighter, so the lower top tube does get some of that back, and opens up more room for body english.

On progressive bikes if you try to stick your butt back you end trying to do a pool noodle fight on a unicycle. The long front end has too much leverage to spin you around on short chainstays and the bike that's supposed to be the epitome of stability feels out of control.

_* We're talking bikes that could be 100mm longer in reach than a Fatillac_


----------



## EatsDirt (Jan 20, 2014)

Wrong. Swing and shank.

None of mikeseeman's friends do yoga. Or wear hightops with bib shorts. And that helmut is not CPSC approved. 

Progressive bikes? Like gender fluid neutral pronouners (pro-niners)? Not gonna take a crap with one of those in the next stall...


----------



## nhodge (Jul 6, 2004)

EatsDirt said:


> Wrong. Swing and shank.
> 
> None of mikeseeman's friends do yoga. Or wear hightops with bib shorts. And that helmut is not CPSC approved.
> 
> Progressive bikes? Like gender fluid neutral pronouners (pro-niners)? Not gonna take a crap with one of those in the next stall...


Whut?


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

mikesee said:


> I have three bikes. One of them is a Lenz.
> 
> All three of them could take 150mm. I see no need.
> 
> ...


It’s not about whether you can make do with less, we’ve all established that riding a single speed is a legitimate “style”; hell, I rode a mountain unicycle on the same trails we rode.

Believe it or not, I use my 210mm dropper more than I use my gears. Trust me, there was a time when I resisted getting a dropper, same can be said for suspension, gears, disc brakes, etc… 

It’s okay to use less, it’s okay to use more, in the greater scheme of life, walking or running is probably more efficient and often faster 😆


----------



## dr.welby (Jan 6, 2004)

EatsDirt said:


> Wrong. Swing and shank.
> 
> None of mikeseeman's friends do yoga. Or wear hightops with bib shorts. And that helmut is not CPSC approved.
> 
> Progressive bikes? Like gender fluid neutral pronouners (pro-niners)? Not gonna take a crap with one of those in the next stall...


Parody really shouldn't punch down(country) but I appreciate the effort.


----------



## rton20s (Aug 27, 2010)

In other news...

OneUp announces new 240mm and 90mm droppers. Mikesee torn on how to react. 

DROPPER POST - V2


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

I just received an email from OneUp Components informing they have just released their 240mm dropper.
=sParty

EDIT: Posted simultaneously with poster above


----------



## rton20s (Aug 27, 2010)

Sparticus said:


> I just received an email from OneUp Components informing they have just released their 240mm dropper.
> =sParty
> 
> EDIT: Posted simultaneously with poster above


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

gahhh. Beat by an hour and 4 other posters.
I got the same email and immediately thought of this thread and all the teeth-gnashing invariably happening elsewhere in the metaverse.

lmao.

I feel so bad for my 6’5” buddy who literally has ONE ride on the 210 he bought last week. 🥴

…anyone looking for a 34.9 dia OneUp 210…?
I probably know a guy selling one…


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

I placed my order. I'll see if the extra 30mm is a benefit or superfluous.


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

Impetus said:


> gahhh.
> I got the same email and immediately thought of this thread and all the teeth-gnashing invariably happening elsewhere in the metaverse.
> 
> lmao.
> ...


I'm sure he could sell it without losing much money.


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

jeremy3220 said:


> I'm sure he could sell it without losing much money.


We’re texting back and forth, im trying to get him to put it on PB buy/sell now, before it has any more time on it. 😂


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

There's also a possibility I've made a terrible mistake and this an unreliable POS haha.


----------



## nhodge (Jul 6, 2004)

Sparticus said:


> I just received an email from OneUp Components informing they have just released their 240mm dropper.
> =sParty
> 
> EDIT: Posted simultaneously with poster above


Mikesee must not be on the board


----------



## OneUp (Nov 26, 2013)

Moar drop indeed. Checkout our Dropper length selector too.

Dropper Length Selector



rton20s said:


> OneUp announces new 240mm and 90mm droppers.
> 
> DROPPER POST - V2


Jon @ OneUp


----------



## slimat99 (May 21, 2008)

I love how OneUp prioritizes clearance. I'm able to fit their 210 in my size M 17.5 frame. I suspect I won't be able to go much if any longer. I can't remember how close I"m cutting it as is.


----------



## EatsDirt (Jan 20, 2014)

jeremy3220 said:


> There's also a possibility I've made a terrible mistake and this an unreliable POS haha.


I thought the same when buying a V2 210. Fortunately it has proven to be much more reliable then the previous V1 170...


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

EatsDirt said:


> I thought the same when buying a V2 210. Fortunately it has proven to be much more reliable then the previous V1 170...


To be honest, I had the cartridge rattle issue on mine where I had to add the two wrappings of electrical tape which was pretty disappointing. I'm hoping that issue is fixed now. Also the extra bushing overlap should help.


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

slimat99 said:


> I love how OneUp prioritizes clearance. I'm able to fit their 210 in my size M 17.5 frame. I suspect I won't be able to go much if any longer. I can't remember how close I"m cutting it as is.


I have a L Ripmo AF with a V2 210
If my math and quick-eyeballing is right I can _JUST_ fit a new 240 completely buried to the clamp. It's tempting, for sure.


----------



## jgshinton (Dec 26, 2021)

NSMB has discussed dropper length and reviewed the 240. If you're a drop doubter this might be an interesting perspective:








NSMB.com - OneUp Introduces The Longest (240mm!) Dropper


The desire to build the longest dropper ever came from internal requests at OneUp...




nsmb.com


----------



## slimat99 (May 21, 2008)

I couldn't resist stealing this comment from the nsmb article: 

"240mm of Alabama blacksnake, but it ain't too beaucoup"


----------



## Mrwhlr (Sep 16, 2006)

Much to my amazement and disgust, the seat remains the same height with my 210mm post all the way down as it did with the 125mm. Moar drop? No. You people lie.


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

Mrwhlr said:


> Much to my amazement and disgust, the seat remains the same height with my 210mm post all the way down as it did with the 125mm. Moar drop? No. You people lie.


Pro Tip: Try setting your saddle height with the post extended.


----------



## Mrwhlr (Sep 16, 2006)

jeremy3220 said:


> Pro Tip: Try setting your saddle height with the post extended.


Nope, still same. Even installed 220mm cranks so my feet could touch the pedals. Lies!


----------



## CannondaleF9 (Nov 17, 2012)

Mrwhlr said:


> Much to my amazement and disgust, the seat remains the same height with my 210mm post all the way down as it did with the 125mm. Moar drop? No. You people lie.


I mean this is an obvious troll post, but I just put a 175 post in my bike this past weekend up from a 150, and it really doesn't look like it's all that lower.
Most of the difference comes from how far the slider drops in the post- the old one didn't utilize the full length of the stanchion like this new one does. 

I could probably fit a 200 in my bike, but why bother, my seat is just going to get shredded on the tire anyway. These numbers seem so much larger in mm than they really are. For suspension they matter a lot more I've noticed, unless you go up at least 50mm, then you notice a difference.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

1 inch = 25.4 millimeters.
In case anyone wonders. 
=sParty


----------



## idividebyzero (Sep 25, 2014)

The more you move the bike around under you the more you notice it. With a 170mm post I only have about 20mm above the collar, but when at the bike park I can slam it all the way down and notice an immediate improvement in jumping. Its not just about hitting your butt, the saddle also doesn't touch your leg as much when leaning and moving around.


----------



## CannondaleF9 (Nov 17, 2012)

idividebyzero said:


> The more you move the bike around under you the more you notice it. With a 170mm post I only have about 20mm above the collar, but when at the bike park I can slam it all the way down and notice an immediate improvement in jumping. Its not just about hitting your butt, the saddle also doesn't touch your leg as much when leaning and moving around.


For me I noticed with my 150mm that on some of the rougher steep terrain at my local bike park the saddle would hit me, which isn't always appreciated. It probably only happened once or twice, but that one memory is what sticks in your head more than the dozens of times 150mm was low enough for you to not hit the seat. 
I have noticed a significant improvement in jumping, and having a lower post would also make it near impossible to get seat-bounced. I'm hoping to see the most improvement in rock slab style riding, so I can just have a lower center of gravity without fear of hitting my seat or the tire. 

To more old school riders, they would ride with the seat between their legs to balance the bike and aid in cornering. I do this on my gravel bike (or I did until I put a dropper on it), and my dad struggled riding with a dropper post at first because the seat was too low for him, even at the bike park.


----------



## slimat99 (May 21, 2008)

CannondaleF9 said:


> For me I noticed with my 150mm that on some of the rougher steep terrain at my local bike park the saddle would hit me, which isn't always appreciated. It probably only happened once or twice, but that one memory is what sticks in your head more than the dozens of times 150mm was low enough for you to not hit the seat.
> I have noticed a significant improvement in jumping, and having a lower post would also make it near impossible to get seat-bounced. I'm hoping to see the most improvement in rock slab style riding, so I can just have a lower center of gravity without fear of hitting my seat or the tire.
> 
> To more old school riders, they would ride with the seat between their legs to balance the bike and aid in cornering. I do this on my gravel bike (or I did until I put a dropper on it), and my dad struggled riding with a dropper post at first because the seat was too low for him, even at the bike park.


Only old school XC riders. Dropping the saddle has been MTB 101 long before the first dropper hit the market. Some do use the saddle between their legs but with a dropped saddle usually lower than 170mm. No one uses the saddle for cornering at full height unless they are racing XC. Anyone who is doing so should drop the saddle and enjoy a big bump up in their cornering game.


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

slimat99 said:


> Only old school XC riders. Dropping the saddle has been MTB 101 long before the first dropper hit the market. Some do use the saddle between their legs but with a dropped saddle usually lower than 170mm. No one uses the saddle for cornering at full height unless they are racing XC. Anyone who is doing so should drop the saddle and enjoy a big bump up in their cornering game.


Yes and I still maintain that old school XC riders are the oddballs when it comes to handling techniques. The only reason not to have the seat slammed is to sit on it. If you set a modern BMX upside down, it doesn't rest on the seat, it rest on the rear tire. This argument only exist because old school XC riders learned to ride with the handicap of a high seat.


----------



## CannondaleF9 (Nov 17, 2012)

jeremy3220 said:


> Yes and I still maintain that old school XC riders are the oddballs when it comes to handling techniques. The only reason not to have the seat slammed is to sit on it. If you set a modern BMX upside down, it doesn't rest on the seat, it rest on the rear tire. This argument only exist because old school XC riders learned to ride with the handicap of a high seat.


My dad stopped riding in the early 1990s, so while he would lower his seat height, his "high" and "low" positions were maybe an inch apart, just enough to change between maximum power output and the ability to descend without locking your knees on awkward impacts. I converted him to using a dropper now and he finally got used to it after 10 or so rides, but he hated it at first and only lowered the post maybe half way each time.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

Back in '05, my 75mm OG Gravity dropper seemed like plenty until I swapped to the 100mm shaft a few years later, which seemed like plenty until I got a 150.... which seemed like WAY more then enough. I then got a 125mm (all that would fit) and I noticed it seems short. I could not believe it was 25mm more then what I was totally satisfied with for years.

I just ordered a 170mm for my new build and I expect to appreciate it over the 150.

But to answer the OPs question: it lets you hit your nether regions on the rear tire with more ease and control..


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

I got my 240mm OneUp installed. I had to set it at 230mm due to the shock tunnel. It feels 'right'. I don't notice any interference with it hitting my thighs. No downsides. It didn't revolutionize my riding or anything vs the 210mm but I don't see any reason not to go with the longer dropper unless I were building something that's XC/marathon oriented.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

kapusta said:


> But to answer the OPs question: it lets you hit your nether regions on the rear tire with more ease and control..



Finally a reason we can all get excited about!


----------



## mike156 (Jul 10, 2017)

I'm short with short legs and run 170mm travel. I'd run more of I could as I still have about 15mm of the lower post showing above the clamp. I can only drop it about 10mm before things get weird with the cable connection at the bottom though so going up to 210 and shining down doesn't make sense.

Not ever running into the seat is nice. No other reason needed... But it is less likely to catch your shorts and it also looks better when it's slammed down low.


----------



## slimat99 (May 21, 2008)

Well it will be nice when we get back to pre dropper saddle heights. Pictured here is a 10" dropper that only weighed 200g!


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

slimat99 said:


> Well it will be nice when we get back to pre dropper saddle heights. Pictured here is a 10" dropper that only weighed 200g!


FWIW I just installed a OneUp 240mm (9.5") dropper on my Canfield ... but it weighs more than 200g. 
=sParty


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Is Mike back?


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Nurse Ben said:


> Is Mike back?


He sure is!


----------



## Enel (Mar 23, 2004)

mikesee said:


> I can, with relative ease, _brrrrrrt _my nether regions on the tire on all three of these bikes if things get steep and I need to get low.
> 
> Given that I can do this with 125mm of drop, of what value then is having yet more drop?


While I have only used 125mm droppers, to me, it's pretty obvious that the value is that you can stay centered over the saddle and still stay as low as possible. It also allows free motion of my body (hips) forward and back while staying low. Riding is dynamic and not having the hump of the saddle in the way would be a definite benefit. Now I want to try a really long dropper!

I could brrrt my chamois with a fully extended post, but my position was terrible and a lower saddle is a huge benefit compared to those days.


----------



## slimat99 (May 21, 2008)

A picture is worth a thousand words.


----------



## *OneSpeed* (Oct 18, 2013)

slimat99 said:


> A picture is worth a thousand words.
> 
> View attachment 1972829


Zactly. 

I know I can go lower, and my butt is not buzzing my tire. Probably because when I need it most I'm hanging off the side of my bike or something. ^^^


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

slimat99 said:


> A picture is worth a thousand words.
> 
> View attachment 1972829


This also to some degree explains why XC oriented riders don't see the point of more drop. XC racers are beautifully efficient in placing their tires through rough terrain. They stay hips high and use impressively little body movement. Gravity racers are trying to go almost all out and aren't so much concerned with energy efficiency as they are squeezing every tenth a second they can out of the section. Your body position is a lot different when you're trying to bomb through something than if you're trying not to blow through your energy threshold. It takes a lot of energy if you're using your full range of motion.

If I'm racing an XC time trial or just trying to keep up on a group ride in rolling terrain I'll use my dropper way less than if I were just riding at my own pace. If your riding position is the same as an XC racers all the time then yeah you don't need your seat that low. If you're using full range of motion to muscle the bike around then you'll probably benefit from having the seat out of the way.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

jeremy3220 said:


> Gravity racers are trying to go almost all out and aren't so much concerned with energy efficiency as they are squeezing every tenth a second they can out if the section. Your body position is a lot different when you're trying to bomb through something than if you're trying not to blow through your energy threshold. It takes a lot of energy if you're using your full range of motion.


I agree with everything you say above, Jeremy.
Quoted the specific words above because they especially struck a chord.
I’m no gravity racer but even I have often arrived at the bottom of a long, fast, jumpy, bumpy, techy descent panting, exhausted, heart pounding.
Always felt that a good descent should leave me as physically wrung out as a stout climb.
=sParty


----------



## slimat99 (May 21, 2008)

jeremy3220 said:


> This also to some degree explains why XC oriented riders don't see the point of more drop. XC racers are beautifully efficient in placing their tires through rough terrain. They stay hips high and use impressively little body movement. Gravity racers are trying to go almost all out and aren't so much concerned with energy efficiency as they are squeezing every tenth a second they can out of the section. Your body position is a lot different when you're trying to bomb through something than if you're trying not to blow through your energy threshold. It takes a lot of energy if you're using your full range of motion.
> 
> If I'm racing an XC time trial or just trying to keep up on a group ride in rolling terrain I'll use my dropper way less than if I were just riding at my own pace. If your riding position is the same as an XC racers all the time then yeah you don't need your seat that low. If you're using full range of motion to muscle the bike around then you'll probably benefit from having the seat out of the way.


Good points. It's why even the best XC racers in the world often look awkward on steeper grades and corners. It's not because they can't rip, it's because they can't afford to rip. It's smart XC racing. Making shapes on the DH is exhausting.


----------



## nya (Oct 22, 2011)

But then there are heaps of XC racers who do use droppers and they do use them to be safer and actually safe energy and mental energy while going down not having to battle the terrain in not-ideal positions. And it does seem more and more XC riders using droppers nowadays.


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

nya said:


> But then there are heaps of XC racers who do use droppers and they do use them to be safer and actually safe energy and mental energy while going down not having to battle the terrain in not-ideal positions. And it does seem more and more XC riders using droppers nowadays.


Agreed, I think this is more about short/mid travel droppers vs longer droppers.


----------



## nya (Oct 22, 2011)

jeremy3220 said:


> Agreed, I think this is more about short/mid travel droppers vs longer droppers.


Fair enough, I am probably not the typical XC rider, but I do love my 200mm on my "XC" bike as well ...I did finish last in my last race thought, so perhaps I would have been faster with less drop!


----------



## Radical_53 (Nov 22, 2006)

Btw., did any of the taller & heavier guys run into longevity/maintenance issues with really long droppers?
I could even think of performance issues when tolerances aren't perfect.


----------



## nya (Oct 22, 2011)

Radical_53 said:


> Btw., did any of the taller & heavier guys run into longevity/maintenance issues with really long droppers?
> I could even think of performance issues when tolerances aren't perfect.


my 200mm 9.8 no issues and it has done decent amount of riding


----------

