Do We Really Need Wireless Dropper Posts? + Rockshox Reverb AXS vs. Fox Transfer Neo

Sometimes, the bike industry really pisses people off. Whether it’s the launch of a new standard or the release of some far-out component with unreal fleeting promises written all over it, cyclists are sure to be triggered by anything with a faint whiff of pretense. Philosophically, that makes sense; we’re all being served things that aim to reconstruct what we consider a perfect object. The bicycle is supposed to be a simple machine that inherently represents untethering from the mainstream, freedom from the rat race, and separation from an automobile-centric society that’s effectively destroying itself. Why would we want to fuck that up?

For many, that nerve was sharply jabbed by wireless derailleurs. Some people despise this new technology, and I’m talking about a seething hatred that breeds contempt, not just passive abhorrence. I can’t say that I’m adamantly against it, but I genuinely hope I don’t see standard wire-operated, hangered derailleurs go the way of my CD collection during my lifetime. Nevertheless, when news came across my inbox about an $860 wireless dropper post last year, I, too, was triggered.

• 
• 

Turning back the clock a couple of decades, I recall the first hydraulic (and spring-operated) dropper posts catching media attention and thinking they were pretty silly with their rubber accordion boots and ridiculously high failure rates. It seemed like the makings of a passing fad. Oh, how minds change. Twenty-some years later, I’d stand on a rooftop and emphatically tell the world that the dropper post is and forever will be one of the best innovations that has happened to the bicycle, ever, period. I run a 220mm dropper post on a rigid mountain bike and wouldn’t have it any other way. If I could pick only one new bike innovation over the last 20 years to remain, that would be it, and I’d happily ride a 26-inch tire, steel, QR-equipped ‘90s Stumpjumper with a square-taper bottom bracket for the remainder of my days… as long as it had a 200mm lever-actuated dropper post.

For or Against Wireless Dropper Posts

As soon as someone added a battery to that majestic component, my fervor was shaken, and it felt like innovation betrayed me. Why was that? I guess the reasons not to like wireless droppers are low-hanging fruit: one, they’re wireless, which is naturally anti-bicycle and has an inherent set of pitfalls (connectivity, the need to charge a battery, etc). Second, they’re ugly. I think the first wireless dropper I saw in person—the old AXS Reverb—is an abomination to bicycle aesthetics. Anytime I see it in a photo on our website, part of me dies inside.

With all that subjective hate out of the way, the functional reasons for wireless dropper posts are slightly more objective and, for the most part, a story of convenience. You could almost say the wireless dropper post is the microwave of bike components.

1. The most obvious is that you don’t have to run a cable and housing, which makes for a clean cockpit and eliminates the setup hassle—imagine this being read aloud in the style of a 1950s radio ad for a dishwasher—and one less cable at or near the bars is one less cable to interfere with a handlebar bag (although the dropper cable and front brake housing are usually the easiest to deal with). I admit, it’s pretty great not having to worry about the tedious nature of running a cable and housing since a lot of mechanically actuated droppers are a little finicky, with various-sized cable knarps and other nuances. Also, don’t forget about the older bikes out there without dropper routing.
2. Actuating the dropper isn’t affected by pinched housing, tight bends, or other issues with the cable. Depending on the bike frame, routing cable housing for a dropper sometimes introduces a tight curve in the transition from the down tube to the seat tube. This can impede the cable from moving smoothly inside the housing. Wireless droppers obviously can’t have this issue.
3. There’s no faff when adjusting saddle height. Another perk is not having to worry about whether the cable is pulled or seated in the post when adjusting the saddle height. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve wrestled with this on a couple of bikes—one being my Cotic SolarisMax that has a very tight seatpost cable entry port. However, that was one bike, and I was really only adjusting saddle height because I was regularly swapping components for review purposes. This particular situation and benefit certainly won’t apply to most people. That being said, I know one couple (and I’m sure there are others) who share bikes. This could be a significant plus for them.
4. It’s easier to swap between bikes. This is another legitimate advantage, but here’s an honest question: how many people regularly swap a dropper post from bike to bike? I do because I review bikes as part of my job, but I imagine it’s not a common practice. That said, if it were more convenient and easy, would it be more of a regular thing?
5. Faster/easier action equals less hand fatigue. This one’s a bit of a stretch to me, but I get it. For folks who have acute hand issues, like carpal tunnel, this may be a game-changer. Nevertheless, I’ve also had some buttery smooth proper lever/dropper combinations. That being said, wireless droppers are extraordinarily fast (which I’ll touch on in the reviews), and the new lever from RockShox increases the relevance of this benefit (which I’ll also cover).

When did Wireless Dropper Posts Drop?

As shocking as it may seem, wireless droppers have been around for almost a decade. In 2013, TransX teased a design that looks very much like the one they currently offer (below left). However, the first one to hit the market was the Magura Vyron eLECT, released in 2016 to a string of relatively unhappy reviewers. Apparently, a poorly executed lever design was the culprit, although maybe the world just wasn’t quite ready for it. Still, it took a few more years before wireless droppers gained mainstream viability. Released in 2019, the original Rockshox Reverb AXS was arguably the first option to gain some market appeal, backed by SRAM’s usual marketing onslaught. However, with an $800 price tag, it unsurprisingly didn’t catch fire despite receiving positive rider and industry feedback.

• 
• 

Since then, a couple of other options have dropped, including the Tranz-X EDP01 and the KS Lev Circuit, and the Magura Vyron has seen a few upgrades. So, after a decade, there were still only a small handful of options in this niche component category. Then, as of last year, the battle of the bulge began.

Fox Transfer Neo Review

While the AXS Reverb and Magura’s offering were gradually tweaked since their respective debuts, the Fox Transfer Neo was the first major departure from these first designs. Released in 2024, the Neo took a different approach; instead of positioning the battery and electronics up around the saddle clamp, they moved the battery bulge (aka control module) to the bottom tube assembly under the wiper seal. The reason for this was two-fold: 1. To improve tire clearance—this was only an issue for folks on small-sized and/or long-travel full-suspension frames where the battery at the seat clamp could make contact with the rear tire when the post was slammed and suspension engaged. I mostly ride hardtails and shorter-travel bikes, so this is a non-issue for me.

Reason number two was to reduce the stack height—the minimum distance from the bottom of the seat post collar to the center of the saddle rails when the post is fully compressed. On the previous version of the AXS Reverb, the stack height is about 64mm. To put that in perspective, the two “analog” droppers with the lowest stack heights on the market, the One Up V3 and the Wolf Tooth Resolve Rev 2, have 30 and 32mm stack heights, respectively. What that means for most people is that they can squeeze a longer-travel dropper post into the same amount of space (34 more millimeters of travel when comparing the Reverb AXS to the OneUp). To close the gap, Fox moved the battery and electronics to the seal head area of the post, offering a wireless dropper with 47mm of stack, a 17mm reduction in stack, and no more tire clearance issues for small long-travel full-suspension bikes.

• 
• 

• 
• 
• 

The Transfer Neo employs the same low-profile two-bolt saddle rail clamp used on the latest analog Transfer post, which was designed in part to achieve a minimal stack height. As you can see in my review of that post from 2024, this was a recent change from the unique fiddle-head-shaped clamp they implemented in 2020. That one featured reverse-threaded hardware and slotted plates that allowed easier saddle swaps, but apparently, there were issues, and they reverted to a more traditional setup with standard M6 bolts and recessed pocket nuts. I actually preferred the 2020 version based on my hatred of typical seat clamp designs that often require bolts to be fully removal to swap a saddle, which usually results in parts flying across the shop floor. However, the newer clamp does seem like a safe, reliable design.

Fox Neo Battery

The battery itself a completely new for Fox. It’s about the size of a Mini-Bic and about the same as the SRAM AXS battery. It also works with Fox Live Valve shocks, and according to Fox, it will also be compatible with other upcoming Neo products. Ideally, it would crossover to power other drivetrain products—like Shimano, maybe?—but only time will tell. The Neo also comes with a cable and USB-C port-equipped charging dock for the battery, which is quite small and great for traveling. It takes about 1.25 to 1.5 hours to charge the battery using this dock, and Fox claims it has a 30 to 40-hour battery life. I found that hard to quantify since it’s based on actuations, but I can confidently say that it lasts a really long time. Part of this may be due to Neo’s clever Shake-to-Wake function, which puts the post’s electronics to sleep after five minutes of inactivity and turns them back on automatically when the bike gets jostled.

During the first month with it, I used it for weeks and kept wondering when the battery would die. Every time I checked the charge level in the app, it still had plenty of life, and I finally charged it out of fear before a big ride. I think it was only half-used at that point. For what it’s worth, it has a battery level indicator with a colored LED that illuminates yellow when the battery is between 10 and 25% and red when under 10% when the battery is inserted. Spares or replacements cost another $79, which is high, but I never worried about carrying a replacement. While bikepacking, it would be very easy to carry the dock and charge it using a cache battery.

• 
• 

• 
• 
• 

One downside to note about the battery is that it’s difficult to remove. You have to really put force on the hinged plastic lever that locks it into place on the non-drive side to make it snap free, which makes it always feel like it might break. I’ve had no such issues, but the process is not as intuitive or easy as that of SRAM AXS products.

Fox Transfer Neo Lever

The lever runs on a standard CR2032 battery and looks like a standard thumb-operated dropper lever. It attaches the bars with a hinged clamp, and it’s simple, to the point, and moves like a traditional lever. However, it requires a fraction of the rotation compared to mechanical dropper levers, saving your thumb from a lot of movement and delivering the near-instantaneous response that makes electronic droppers appealing. It also has a relatively low-profile design compared to many other levers I’ve used, which reduces the risk of unintended thumb knuckle interference. On that note, the Transfer Neo app also includes a “bike park mode,” allowing users to disable dropper actuation to keep it compressed when you don’t need it.

• 
• 

Unfortunately, the Fox Neo didn’t solve the aesthetics problem with wireless dropper posts. It essentially looks like a 1984 Tandy 1000 mounted just above the seat clamp, and you can see it coming from a half-mile away. I think it might look better if I had the ideal length post and the control module was positioned just a millimeter or two above the seat clamp. This is a 31.6/200mm post, and there are still several centimeters of lower tube exposed due to my long legs. Additional 220 and 240mm options would be welcomed; Fox currently only offers the Neo in five lengths ranging from 100 to 200mm of travel in 25mm increments.

Price

The $859 price tag on the Fox Transfer Neo makes a little more sense when juxtaposed with the former Reverb AXS. Until recently, the Reverb AXS was priced at $800 USD, which was clearly the basis for Fox’s pricing decision—although I’d argue that the Neo is a massive improvement over the aging Reverb AXS. However, it’s enough to make your head spin when considering the fact that you’re simply buying a seat post. To address the elephant in the room, I didn’t know this dropper post was nearly a thousand bucks until after I received it, installed it, and started using it last year. Had I been aware, I may have decided not to review such a high-dollar item. However, curiosity got the best of me and I thought it was worth putting some miles to attempt to understand why it’s so expensive.

Performance

Over the first few weeks with the Neo, when it was a novelty, many friends at our local bike shop/watering hole saw it on my hardtail and asked what I thought. Every time, I kind of waffled, scratched my head, and said something like, “Well… I’m still not sure I understand it, but it works really well, and the battery seems to last forever… and it’s lightning fast.” It’s sincerely quicker than any other dropper post I’ve used, including the new Reverb AXS. When it was released, Fox engineers said that Bluetooth wasn’t fast enough, so they developed their own wireless protocol and named it Neo. They also said it was 20 times faster than “their competition” at 26 milliseconds from lever press to post movement. That said, I’d consider the Reverb AXS fast enough. It’s kind of like comparing two really quick-engagement hubs (e.g. Project 321 G3 and I9 Hydra). If you really concentrate, you can discern a difference, but it doesn’t really matter too much to me on the trail. Still, it has a very refined, speedy feel that’s genuinely impressive.

• 
• 

It’s also wildly powerful, and as a result, it could easily be one of the best droppers I’ve used for hoisting a seat bag. And that’s with the air pressure untouched from the factory. Neil also has one and shares the same sentiment. When he checked the pressure on his, it was set to 165 PSI out of the box. He upped it to 180 and reported that it was “VERY!” powerful. It’s unclear what the recommended PSI range is (again, lack of proper documentation), but the cap on the Schrader valve under the seat post clamp top plate says not to exceed 350. That power also gives the Neo the loudest return “thunk” I’ve ever heard from a dropper, although I’ve been told that the Specialized Command Post was louder. Lastly, you can kind of feather the Neo. Not by half-pressing the lever as you would on a mechanically actuated post, but quick clicks result in a stuttering action.

• 
• 

Reliability and Maintenance

I’ve had this Fox Transfer Neo since last September, but I’ve yet to reach Fox’s recommended 8,000-actuation service interval. That’s one thing that’s pretty cool about the Fox app; it keeps up with how many times you’ve actuated the post. As shown in this screenshot, I’m not even close. As far as repairs and service, I’ve yet to tear this thing down, and neither Neil nor I have had any luck finding a service manual specifically for the Neo, but Fox claims the dust wiper can easily be removed to add light grease for lubrication. We’ll be sure to update this post when we learn more.

• Model Tested: Fox Transfer Neo, 31.6mm, 200mm
• Actual Weight: 735 grams
• Place of Manufacture: Taiwan
• Price: $859
• Manufacturer’s Details: Fox

RockShox Reverb AXS Review (V2)

Today’s release of the revamped Reverb AXS dropper post wasn’t a complete surprise. SRAM filed a pretty descriptive patent application that went public last year. The most obvious change was that, similar to the Neo, they were relocating the battery and control module below the dust wiper seal on the post’s lower tube. This filing happened before the official Fox Neo release date, but it’s unclear who came up with the idea first. Still, there are a few disparities between the two posts, although the most apparent is the orientation of the battery. SRAM oriented the battery toward the front, which I found does a little better job at minimizing the muck and mud off the battery access area. The Fox Transfer Neo has the battery facing the rear of the bike, of course, although the user manual features a diagram clearly displaying an optional forward battery orientation, although I’ve yet to find where that’s available or documentation on how to reverse it.

A large part of SRAM’s reasoning behind the move was similar to Fox’s: to avoid interference with the rear tire. Placing it at the top of the lower tube solves this and helps maintain a better travel length-to-lower tube length ratio. Again, the tire clearance issue with the old Reverb post was no concern of mine. However, this move also allowed SRAM to extend the available travel options beyond the previous iteration of Reverb AXS that maxed out at 170mm without making the overall post too long for most frames. With that, they are offering this Reverb AXS in 11 length options ranging from 100mm to the massive 250mm version in 25mm increments. Unfortunately, RockShox didn’t reduce the stack hight that much. The new post has a measured stack of about 60mm.

Moving the control module and battery to the lower tube also allowed RockShox to bring back the twin-bolt clamp head, a much more reliable design than that on the current Reverb AXS, which is far easier to use but can rotate if not properly torqued.

• 
• 

• 
• 
• 

That Classic Reverb Squish

Aside from the longer available lengths, the standout feature of the new Reverb AXS is “ActiveRide,” a built-in compliance system first introduced on the Xplore AXS dropper. In summary, when fully extended, the post remains firm and stable, but once dropped, ActiveRide kicks in and turns it into a suspension seat post with one or two centimeters of squish. The amount of compliance varies based on how far the post is dropped. When I first experienced it, prior to reading SRAM’s literature, I think I muttered, “Ah, just like old-school Reverbs.” As many readers may recall, the original Reverb had issues and was notorious for becoming “squishy” after a fair bit of use.

• 
• 

I won’t dive too far into the internal tech behind it, but here’s a summary as I understand it and my impressions. When at full extension, the negative air chamber’s volume is nearly zero, closing the valve and creating a firm feel when force is applied to the saddle. When the valve opens and the post compresses mid-way, it functions much like an air spring, featuring a positive air chamber above the main piston and a negative chamber below. Both chambers can be pressurized and adjusted via a valve located on the post head, allowing for some built-in compliance—similar to the existing gravel-specific version. The patent application said it could compress up to 40mm when in the intermediate position, but based on my measurements, it seems to be more like 20mm max. Either way, I really like the squish, particularly when relaxing on descents. SRAM/RockShox claims that they developed it to improve traction on steep, technical terrain, particularly for e-bikes, but to me, its added cushion on lazy descents is what it does best.

Battery Life

The Reverb AXS uses the same standard lithium-ion AXS batteries used in the derailleur and the previous Reverb AXS model. In the current pre-release documentation, SRAM makes no claims for battery life, and unfortunately, I’ve been unable to access the component in the SRAM app. Hopefully this will change upon release and perhaps a forthcoming hardware/software update. That said, SRAM claims that the previous RockShox Reverb AXS dropper post battery offers approximately 40 hours of riding time on a full charge, and I imagine this one is similar.

One more thing on the subject of the battery: the post also has an actuation button on the top of the control module for use in the event of a dead lever battery, which is a nice touch.

Price and Performance

With the release of the new Reverb AXS, SRAM did what not too many brands can accomplish in this day and age—they reduced the price. The Reverb AXS was introduced in 2019 with a retail price of around $800 USD, and it didn’t budge for a long while. They quietly reduced it to $645 recently, and I’m guessing that when the embargo lifts around the new model, the price will drop even further. The new model reviewed here is priced at $549 (or €600/£535/AU$945, which includes VAT). I believe that is without a lever, however, but I’ll clarify once pricing goes live.

Even with a $249 reduction, I’ve found that the new RockShox Reverb AXS is a vast improvement over the old model. It seems significantly faster and more powerful. And it has a few nice touches, such as an actuation button on top of the control module, allowing you to compress or extend the post with the touch of a button if your lever battery bites the dust. The Rocker Pod lever is another plus. While it’s not new with this release, and some people may find it a little bulky, I liked having multiple touchpoints, including a trigger action with the pointed front extrusion.

• 
• 

As mentioned, the Fox Transfer Neo is a little faster, more powerful, and has softer/easier compression. And, you can kind of feather the Neo, whereas the Reverb AXS is either on or off—even a quick press brings the post to full a return. However, for the price, the Reverb AXS is fast and strong enough. So far, what’s lacking for me is documentation. I’d like to know how easy it is to grease under the wiper seal, for example. And, the lack of app access is a little frustrating for monitoring battery life. Both of those will likely change pretty quickly this morning, so I’ll also update this as soon as I know more.

Reliability and Maintenance

I’ve only had the Reverb AXS for a couple of weeks, so I can’t speak to its reliability, and I haven’t serviced it yet. SRAM claims that the new battery placement allows for quick disassembly without specialized tools. They also state that there will be a full range of replacement parts available, including upper tubes, piston assemblies, lower tubes, seat clamps, electronic modules, and inner base assemblies. Routine lubrication is recommended every 300 hours of ride time (roughly one year), and they mention a two-year service kit for long-term maintenance. I’ll report back when I have a little more time on this post.

• Model Tested: RockShox Reverb AXS, 30.9mm, 200mm
• Actual Weight: 709 grams
• Place of Manufacture: Taiwan
• Price: $549
• Manufacturer’s Details: SRAM

Further Reading

Make sure to dig into these related articles for more info...