Thanks for response and revised manuscript. Even though the authors did good job in responding to referees, some of the important points raised by referees were not adequately implemented in the revised manuscript. Please consider the below points and implement them in the main text:

- Referee 1, 3rd major comment: Possibility of two particle types, one solid phase (bouncing) and one liquid phase (sticking) vs. one particle type of intermediate phase (50% bouncing). This point should be discussed (at least mentioned).

- Referee 1, 3rd minor comment: This is an important point to be justified in the paper. For example, Shiraiwa et al., PCCP, 15, 11441, 2013 has shown that equilibration timescale of hygroscopic growth should be less than mili-seconds for SOA (Fig. 4b), which can be used to support author's argument.

- Referee 2: Potential occurrence of phase separation and its effect on particle bounce is potentially important and interesting point to be discussed. I suggest adding at least one paragraph discussing this issue.

- Abstract, L26: Please remove the word "instantaneous". Liquid phase does not always mean instantaneous partitioning. Timescales of partitioning depend not only on phase state but also on many other factors such as particle size/concentrations, etc.

Thanks for the revised manuscript. I am pleased to accept this manuscript for publication in ACP.