Field Test: The Commencal Meta SX is a Bruiser

Aug 19, 2022
by Alicia Leggett  

PINKBIKE FIELD TEST

Commencal Meta SX


Words by Alicia Leggett; photography by Dave Trumpore

It's big, it's metal, and it's the least expensive bike we tested. The Commencal Meta SX looks pretty interesting on paper, with its mixed wheel sizes, 1286 mm wheelbase, and robust frame. So what does the new Meta SX have to say for itself?

This updated Meta has the reach dialed back from the previous version by a centimeter, but that centimeter is added to the chainstays to lengthen the rear end, despite the change to a 27.5" rear wheel. Commencal was ahead of the trend when its downhill racers started winning races on mullet setups, but this is the first time the Andorran brand has ventured to make a trail or enduro bike with mismatched wheel sizes. Still, with updated geometry and an almost refined look, it's clear that Commencal means business here.

Meta SX Details

• Travel: 160 mm rear / 170 mm fork
• Aluminum frame
• Wheel size: Mixed
• 63.6º - 64.0º head angle
• 78.1º-78.5º seat tube angle
• 448mm chainstays
• Sizes: S, M, L (tested), XL
• Weight: 35.9 lb / 16.3 kg
• Price: $5,800 USD as tested, $3,200 - $6,500 USD
• Commencal
The Meta SX sports a flip chip, which gives riders the option to run the head angle between 64º and 63.6º, and Commencal says the kinematics have been tweaked to make the bike more versatile and agile than its predecessor, the Meta AM 29. Otherwise, the frame details are similar to what we've seen on Commencal's other bikes: it's aluminum, the cables are internally routed through ports that keep dirt out and keep the housing from rattling, there are ISCG-05 tabs, and the frame is protected by rubber padding.

photo

The Meta SX is available in a range of build options, from the most basic 'Essential' build to the fanciest 'Signature' kit. All the builds come in under $6,500 USD, and though that's a lot of money, it's almost a steal in today's bike market. Thanks to worldwide supply chain issues, Commencal also offers 'A La Carte' configuration, allowing customers to cherry-pick parts to build complete or incomplete bikes to order based on what Commencal has in stock. Our test bike had parts similar to the 'Team' build kit with just a few minor differences, and it would come in at $5,800 USD if purchased using the A La Carte tool.


photo
FIELD NOTES

photo
photo

Climbing

The Commencal Meta SX is a slow and steady climber. It feels pretty efficient, with very minimal bobbing or sagging under the pedals, but it's hard to escape the weight (35.9 lb / 16.3 kg) and length (1286 mm wheelbase) of the bike, and it's just a lot of bike to move up the hill, especially through corners.

It's by no means an especially poor climber. In fact, we were all impressed by its traction and ability to churn up the climbs, even if the weight made us less than excited to sprint uphill. The bike is quite balanced over roots and rocks, making it easy to spin up the techy spots, and the steep seat tube angle helped keep us up over the front of the bike to prevent the front wheel from wandering ahead of us due to the slack head angle. With the long rear end, the front of the bike never felt prone to lifting, and it was easy to transfer power right into the rear wheel.

It's a bike made to get up to get down, so don't expect to set any uphill speed records on this one, but it'll make the ascent comfortable if you don't rush it.

photo

photo
photo

Descending


The main words I keep returning to when describing the Meta SX are long and stable. Hopping on it after some laps on the Deviate and Transition, I was surprised at how much input it took to turn the bike. But after a few laps, I started feeling how well the bike could keep traction when leaned over, and playing with that feeling of carving became very fun.

It rained hard for almost the entire test period, so each bike's ability to stick to the wet roots and slick ground became increasingly important. The Meta SX has impressive traction on off-camber sections, which I attribute to just how stable it feels and how well it carries momentum forward in straight lines. (Of course, that means quick turns are not its specialty.) It's one of those bikes that loves rough terrain and feels best when pointed down something gnarly.
Timed Testing


This timed lap was what I'll call "tech-flow." It was a tech trail that made sense in the way that it flowed, and it was easy to find fast lines and carry speed. It started relatively flat with some pedally sections, then dropped into steeper, choppier terrain, with a series of stair-step drops, a few root doubles, and some fast corners.

Don't forget that timing is just one of many ways to judge a bike, and a fast lap time is a.) subject to my own preferences and comfort on the bike and b.) doesn't always mean it's the best for everyone.

Alicia Leggett: "The Commencal Meta SX finished third in my timed testing, 1.6 seconds off the Intense and 0.1 ahead of the Transition. I felt great anywhere I needed to get off the brakes and just let the bike go, but I think I was a little slow in the twisty corners."

The centered body position while climbing carries over to descending, with the long rear end balancing out the slack front of the bike. At times it felt tough to manage both ends of the bike at once - while the reach isn't that long, the slack head angle and fairly long chainstays can make it feel like a lot to handle. That feeling was less apparent at higher speeds and on trails where the bike felt more in its element: the straight, steep rough stuff. There is that flip chip that can be used to speed up the handling a touch, but that amounts to more of a small attitude adjustment rather than a wholesale transformation.

The Meta SX would make an excellent bike park rig, as the burly bike would almost definitely hold up well over time and the stable, dampened ride feels great on chunky trails and steep, rocky tech. It's also a fair option for someone who wants to race enduro, as long as climbing and agility aren't priorities, and would work best for riders who live near steep, rough terrain.

photo


Pros

+ Very capable in the gnar
+ Excellent traction & stability
+ Relatively inexpensive
+ A La Carte build configurator

Cons

- Not agile, long rear end can require more effort to manage at slower speeds
- Not light




The 2022 Enduro Bike Field Test is presented by Rapha, POC, and Continental. Thanks for keeping us dressed, safe, and rolling rubber side down.



Posted In:
Reviews and Tech Field Test Reviews Enduro Bikes Commencal Commencal Meta Sx


Author Info:
alicialeggett avatar

Member since Jun 19, 2015
743 articles
Report
Must Read This Week
Police Called to Scott Sports Headquarters as CEO Dispute Continues
63819 views
First Ride: Fox Releases New Grip X & Grip X2 Dampers
45926 views
Pinkbike Poll: Center Lock or 6-Bolt Brake Rotor Mounting?
42315 views
Tech Briefing: Fancy Suspension, Carbon Wheels, Spring Apparel & More
37082 views
Pinkbike's DH Fantasy League: Get Your Team On The Line for Round 1
33262 views
SRAM Patent Shows Compact Motor x Battery Unit
31374 views
Bike Check: Craig Evans' Airdrop Edit V5
30386 views
First Look: Fair Bicycle's Drop Best Offset Saddle Clamp is Universally Compatible
29078 views

296 Comments
  • 156 3
 It still surprises me that the Meta seems to always get called out for being hefty, while the Norco Range skirts through at 37lbs for a top-end build, with Bike of the Year. Maybe other bikes get called out as well, but it always seems like the Meta is referred to as some kind of Andorran anchor
  • 132 27
 Norco is canadian whereas the Commencal is french, there's your answer
  • 53 18
 We did mention the weight when we reviewed the Range - it's no lightweight, especially considering it has a carbon frame. Extra heft isn't enough to disqualify a bike from Bike of the Year if the performance is high enough, though.
  • 33 2
 The Range is a bit of an exception, given the performance it offers. It's essentially a pedallable DH bike. I think weight in the Enduro category isn't a great metric to pick on anyways, and perhaps the Meta gets too much flack for that.
  • 46 0
 The "Andorran Anchor" is actually the name of Commencal's new cross country race bike slated for release in early 2023.
  • 6 5
 Norcos are heavy and crack like crazy. Last year i cracked my Sight and two friends cracked their Range. The Range is heavier than my Scott Gambler with a big cassette on it. Changed my Sight frame to a used Xprezo Adhoc, way lighter and much more fun going down.
  • 10 2
 Norco bikes have always pedaled decievingly well despite their hefty weight.
  • 14 2
 @Ba1rog: commencal is just as bad if not worse for cracking. I cracked my Furious in not 1 but 5 places, and two buddies cracked both of their Clashes in the same spot.
Loved the value, the suspension, and well as the customer service when I needed it. But can’t say I was left too impressed with the quality or reliability
  • 4 0
 @brycepiwek: Yeah i heard about Commencal issues, at least they are affordable bikes and the customer service is there. Sadly i can't say the same about Norco. The best customer service I had was Scott, Santa Cruz and Cane Creek.
  • 3 1
 I love the weight and its the best in the steep
  • 4 0
 @SileTzar: But what about French Canadian... Supposedly they go together!
  • 6 0
 @Ba1rog: along with the brands you mention DVO has amazing customer service too.
  • 2 0
 @mikekazimer: I noticed the brand name was pronounced a couple different ways in the vid. Sometimes with the emphasis on the first syllable, other times on the last. Which one is correct? Just curious.
  • 12 1
 @SileTzar: Not french, from Andorra.
  • 4 1
 @Ba1rog: I had the worst customer service with Cane Creek.
  • 2 0
 I sold my Range precisely because it was too heavy, but it descended and handled incredibly. Amazing bike, if you don't like to pedal big days consistently.
  • 2 0
 @Thirty3: For Cane Creek it was just a bearing issue.

I can add Easton customer was not great and Fox suspension service was amazing during the Crankworks a few years ago.
  • 3 0
 @bridgermurray: , "Andorran Anchor is the name of the new Commencal XC bike" AHHAAHAHAHAH! good one.
  • 17 0
 @BiNARYBiKE: I can say cause it's a Catalan/occitane name with the ç prounouced as S. The last silabe it's the strong one. "co-men-SAL"
  • 2 0
 @Ba1rog: fyi adhocs are very easy to crack
  • 13 0
 All the bikes in this field test are within 600g of each other, at this weight level the difference is not obvious, and most of the other bikes are carbon! Wtf?
  • 4 1
 @DG370: The weight of an enduro bike just does not really matter. Those bikes are all quite effecient pedallers and they are made to go down fast. If you want to have fun uphill just buy an XC or downcountry bike simple as that. This weight difference will make you like a minute slower on a 1h climb.
  • 3 5
 @lkubica: indeed, all my favourite bikes have been 15.5-16.5 kgs, and have done 40km or more a day on them.

The only time it does matter I feel is for the fairer sex, 1-1.5 kgs lighter is necessary for them to muscle the bike around pro-rata
  • 1 0
 @DG370: Yeah, I had to train a bit to be able to put meta 29 onto the roof rack Wink I never weighted it but with coil it sure weight over 17kg...
But I wonder if this does not mater more on the rolling terrain when you have to pump or on a twisty terrain where you have to lean this f*cker alot
. Yesterday I hade to stop in the middle of a very phisical track, but I will just assume it was bacause of those all inusive holidays, haha.
  • 1 0
 @cdel: Wow what part is more prompt to crack, I have sadly a medium size? I sent Dirt Merchant and A line a couple time with it and local trails with it. Meanwhile on the sight i cracked my Shight on second run on crank it up.
  • 1 0
 It's only because they aren't carbon like everything else seems to be these days!
  • 1 0
 @brycepiwek: so did you and your buddies get new frames..or just discount on new frames?
  • 6 1
 @watchtower: French staff technically based in Andorra for taxes purposes.
  • 4 0
 @lkubica: I agree to some extent, but I still put some weight into bike weight (pun intended). Most enduro races still have huge long pedal climbs. It helps to be fresher before dropping into a rough descent stage.
  • 3 1
 I know it’s listed as a con, but I don’t think they called this bike out so much for being heavy as they did for its lack of agility. They went on and on about that in the video.
  • 3 0
 @lkubica: I agree with you overall but an hour climb on a typical enduro is more than a minute slower compared to a short travel trail bike. Probably closer to 10 minutes in my experience. I am about 4 min slower on my favorite 30 minute climb. The testers at Biker's Edge found 1.5-2min on a 15min climb. That's not to say enduros are incompetent climbers, in fact I find them superlative clearing short technical sections, but at the end of the day they are slow and I can do fewer laps before running out of gas. You can't have it all.
  • 1 2
 @jdejace: But this is not all because weight. There are many factors, tires and suspension are the most significant. Time loss bacause weight can be very easily estimated with simple physics.
  • 1 0
 @Thirty3: Really? They replaced my first gen inline 3 times any without problems. Tha last time they conceded it wasn't really production ready but Specialized pushed them to spec the bikes with them before solving this issue
  • 2 0
 @lkubica: Weight/mass is always the number 1 factor (total mass), unless you are going to dismiss the additional power needed to balance the physics equation and get the same elapsed time on a heavier setup.

The drag of the tires can be a factor, but we are not talking about “hardback” in EWS. The weight of the tires is more significant than the tread design and rubber compound when it comes to elapsed time.

Further down the line of possible inefficiencies is suspension (particularly modern enduro suspension). These inefficiencies can be seen over much longer races like XC as apposed to enduro style racing.
  • 3 0
 @reqq:
Everything was replaced under warranty which was great.
  • 2 0
 @PauRexs: Occitane is crazy mix and sounds really cool.
  • 7 2
 @lkubica: Being a minute slower than your buddies on a group ride feels like eternity. That means they've stopped at the top- had a drink of water, maybe a power bar, made some jokes at your expense and are ready to go again just as you show up feeling like a shmuck for holding them back.

In exchange, you are maybe 3 seconds faster downhill which is barely enough time to think of a sarcastic remark.
  • 2 3
 @ICKYBOD: Yeah, because all your buddies ride uphill 100% so you cannot just give those 1% more power to keep up. If you race your buddies uphill you are rather doing XC or downcountry. I was specifically talking about enduro, you know, heavy bikes made to go up just to go down fast. If you don't go down this fast, get a light 120-130-140mm bike and you are done.
Those kinds of internet discussions are really dumb actually. Many of you need to believe that this weight is a magical measure that matter so much, I get it, it's a hobby. Actually you need to believe it and you feel better having a lighter bike or you feel worse having a heavier bike. I really get it, mental attitude is a very important factor. So there is really no point in arguing, it's just like talking about religion or vaccination.
  • 3 0
 @lkubica:
I don't know about you, but I am at my best in any sport when I am NOT tired and winded.

It is hard to go DOWN Fast if we have too tired after going up. For me, 5 lbs riding on all that uphill makes a huge difference in how I go downhill.

If you Enduro Race, you will know that if we are too slow on the Uphills, then we get a time penalty. Even if we do NOT get a time penalty, we have less time to rest, hydrate, and eat before going down. Also, all those Sections adds up and assists in fatiguing the body. Most guys are at their worst the last DH section due to all that UP-HILLING. We want to be our best on the last run, not our worse.

Even the Pros do their best in keeping the bike light as possible (within reason of course). None of them use DH helmets because way too heavy, they use Enduro Helmets like the Troy Stage to keep it light. Martin Maes even uses 180mm rotors because he says for him that is good enough, and it helps saves weight.
  • 2 0
 @lkubica: Literally... the first comments from the reviewers was a negative about the weight on this bike. A few days before, when the TR Patrol Carbon was revealed... the majority of comments were about its weight, and the Aluminum versions even greater weight. It seems to me, that the first aspects of a new bike that most people want know are "weight" and "reach". Those two are deal breakers for most, everything else can be accommodated.

Weight matters... certainly from a pure physics perspective, certainly from a race or elapsed time perspective, and clearly from a qualitative perceived opinion based perspective of most riders.

If the drawbacks of weight are not important to you, then that is completely understandable... but you cant make claims that its all in minds of others and has not real world impact.
  • 1 0
 @lkubica: Well I was just kind of kidding. I'd actually say me and my buddies ride about 50% uphill. I enjoy making my buddies give the extra 1% while I yell things like "I f#(king love climbing!" back at them to keep them motivated. I'm basically the Tony Robbins of mountain biking.
  • 2 1
 @HendersonMike: meanwhile the entire canyon cllctv running the d4 carbon, only 60 grams lighter than the composite model. In my opinion, people who race enduro do not really worry about weight, for example my specialized enduro is literally heavier than my norco sight alloy, but when climbing i don't actually notice it. If you are racing enduro, you should be spending less time worrying about weight and more time actually training and it wont be an issue.
  • 1 1
 @Sheepo123:
Does not matter if I train 0 hours a week or 100 hours a week. 5 lbs will matter. For me it matters more, because I don't really train, I just show up and race. I don't take none of this Mountain Bike stuff too seriously like all y'all Millennial Kool Kids. Please discuss....
  • 1 0
 @HendersonMike: if you aren't taking racing seriously then I can totally understand caring about the weight more, I would to tbh. In honesty, I just assumed everyone looking at this review would be hard out enduro racers since it's an enduro racing bike, but I now see how stupid that was. For me, who goes to the gym 5 times a week, and tries to match that number on actual rides, weight on a bike is only my second concern over performance. I can understand a more casual rider caring tho. For background, I'm 16, want to race professionally.
  • 3 0
 @Sheepo123: ,
weight matters to everyone.

I hate to break the news to you but when it comes to biking, the Energy produced (measured in Watts) is:
E=0.5 x m x v2

Where m = mass, so that means the heavier the bike weighs, the more Watts you will use moving that bike. Now some guys might produce more watts than others, but it will still come down to weight.

even the Top Pros and the people that are Serious Racers care about weight, as they too try to keep the bike as light as possible (within reason of course).

.
  • 2 2
 @Sheepo123: ,
In addition, I hope you and everyone else on PinkBike don't take Mountain Biking too seriously either, because it will Never pay the bills.

To me Mountain Biking is just a hobby and nothing more. Being the fastest guy in my hood won't pay the bills, and the only Mountain Bikers I know that are NOT struggling with Life and Bills are the people who DON'T TREAT Mtn Biking seriously. Being fast on a Mountain Bike really means jack shit! and the only reason we have Pro Mountain Bikers is because these guys can't play the Elite Sports like Football, Soccer, Baseball, Basketball, Hockey, Tennis, or Track.

So please stop with your "weight don't matter just train more" BS. HAHAHAHA! and yes, weight does matter, the math proves it!

Please discuss...
  • 2 0
 @HendersonMike: the whole weight thing is a curious discussion because there are some downhillers who are adding lead weights to their carbon frames to make them heavier, going lighter only works to a certain point, and I've always found 16 KG to work the best, it has the best balance between weight to carry speed down the hill, but at the same time is not to heavy to climb or move around. Even if I did try to make my bike lighter, I wouldnt go below 14 KG, because In my opinion it is just to light and gets thrown around on rough trails to easily
  • 1 1
 @Sheepo123:
I hear you. I also find it strange how my 52 pound Santa Cruz Bullit seems to DH so much better than any DH bike I have owned.

However, in the flat sections, as well as the tighter sections, it is hard to move a heavy bike around, and I have the POWER to pedal my Bullit (because it comes with an engine).

I actually can see the Super Lightweight Riders and the Wimenz adding weight to their DH bikes and Tune their bikes for the weight, because a heavy bike down the the rough chunk and the steeps does seem to calm stuff down and makes us go faster.

Keep in mind though that DH runs are fairly short, and on DH courses they have NO "Connector" sections they have to pedal through, and DH Racers don't have to pedal between sections. I am telling you it all adds up!

Look at every Enduro Racers, and you will see their bikes weigh between 14-15kgs... because they have to pedal!

Please discuss...
  • 3 0
 @HendersonMike: I understand what your saying, I'm not trying to say that id buy a 25 KG bike and just train more to get around that weight, no one can ride a 25 KG bike like a normal person, but what I'm saying is that if a bike weighs 16 KG instead of 14 or 15 KG it should not really be a make or break deal, and something that makes you buy a different bike instead. a kilogram or so difference from your old bike should be something that you would get used to reasonably quickly, because at the end of the day it really Isn't a lot of weight. And on the professional racing thing, its not my main plan, I absolutely am not counting on that as a career, and am one hundred percent planning on getting a "real job", its just that racing is what I love with all of my heart, and if the opportunity comes for me to get on a factory team and travel around the world racing my bike, even if I earn next to no money from it, Ill take that without a second thought.
  • 1 4
 @Sheepo123: ,
A 16kg Enduro Bike is a Deal Break for me and ALL Enduro Racers!
  • 3 2
 @lkubica:

Agree. Weight is a bunch of marketing bullshit. My XL transition spire was almost 39 pounds and I had zero issues climbing or descending because the weight. Couldn’t even tell in fact.
  • 2 1
 @gabriepa: , I agree if you are over 200 lbs, then 5 pounds means nothing. However, 10 lbs you will notice a difference no matter how much you weigh. Ride a 29 pound bike for more than 20 miles after riding your 39 lb bike for the same 20 miles the previous day. Tell me then if you do NOT notice a difference.
  • 2 0
 @HendersonMike: for sure, thats not the type of riding i do though haha, i do a lot of shuttle laps and park riding, with a more pedally adventure once every month or two
  • 2 1
 @Ba1rog: Unfortunately the welds under the seat tube pivot are prone to cracking. Just keep an eye out.
  • 1 0
 @cdel: Thanks for the info i will keep an eye on it! I am gonna stop Dirt Merchant with the Xprezo haha.
  • 92 1
 More like Commencal Meta SeX.
  • 39 0
 this is why I use pinkbike
  • 8 1
 The add for this bike was called sx ed

www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLmPnSLvij8&vl=en
  • 32 2
 This is why SLX stuff is also the best. A few minutes with a sharpie and you have SEX drivetrain and brakes.
  • 39 0
 I miss the Levy ads for Beta... said noone ever.

What happened to some sort of compensation though for those who did subscribe? Everyone just quit talking about it.
  • 16 0
 Yeah no shit… what happend to my beta subscription…
  • 17 0
 As a way to make it up to you, please enjoy a half-year subscription to Male Douche magazine, coming your way soon!
  • 3 0
 @fleischist: beta geta meta
  • 29 0
 @VtVolk: I bought a subscription right before they went under. What a cash grab to have a sale right before going under, knowing you would never deliver product. Last time I support an outside product monetarily.
  • 14 0
 I've asked @brianpark both on a podcast comment thread and through a direct message and have heard no response. Pretty annoying actually since he specifically said they were working on something. Guess ole CEO Robin had other plans. Maybe a free shreddit of gravel bikers?
  • 12 1
 @VtVolk: Imagine the Male Douche version of this! www.pinkbike.com/photo/23135929

Be safe be well,
Incognito Robin
  • 1 0
 @NERyder: my experience exactly
  • 3 2
 It's possible to do a successful paid site, but they were nowhere near it. First of all print makes no sense. Secondly if you want people to pay you need to bring some solid value. I read a few premium articles and the value was not there, great pictures and round words are not enough. What would be valuable is in depth very technical unbiased tests and comparisons of various bikes. I mean like field test buy not what companies happen to send you for free and with some in depth analisisincluding suspension kinematics and even some telemetry. This would be something I would pay for happily. But subjective reviews of gear company decides to send are there for free, Noone will ever pay for this.
  • 2 0
 @lkubica: For what it’s worth, I actually liked the Beta Tests (their review series).
  • 2 0
 @Muscovir: Me too. I thought they were some of the best and I always went to them, along with Pinkbike, when considering a new bike purchase.
  • 7 2
 @endoguru: Going back even further, I used to love the "Bible of Bike Tests" format that MTB Mag did every year, back when the Beta crew was still working at MTB Mag.

One thing that they did waaaaay better than PB, is that they mostly just pitted relevant bikes against each other. I kinda couldn't care less how some steel bike from a tiny boutique brand rides. What I do want to know is how the new Megatower compares to the Trek Slash, Specialized Enduro, Canyon Torque and Norco Range.
  • 3 0
 @Muscovir: Yes! I was acrually thinking about this more than the Beta tests. Especially the early years when Seb and Brice were part of the mag. Your assesment was on the money. I find the little boutique bikes interesting, but how many of us are actually going to buy one? I’ve tried a couple over the years and they are never as good or refined as the bigger brands. People love to bitch about the big boys, but they make good bikes that are typically easier to get serviced and find parts for.
  • 2 0
 @NERyder: would really like to hear from @notoutsideceo on this. edit: and just a couple comments further, there it was. Thanks for your service @notoutsideceo!

On a similar note, it took several months and many, many, emails to get a refund from them for one of the roadie magazines they bought and then closed.
  • 32 3
 I have to say I don’t understand the complaints about lengthened chainstays. I owned the new full 29 Meta for just over a year, and ultimately sold it as I found the fore-aft balance was off, the chainstays were just too short for the large reach.
Switching to a bike with 10mm shorter reach and a equally longer chainstay length, and otherwise similar geometry numbers immediately offered far more confidence in the corners.
This model looked to improve on that with a longer chainstay to match the already long front centre. It may be a valid concern on the smaller models, but I see no downside to smaller chainstays on bikes I’ve ridden.
  • 9 0
 Agreed. Banshee Titan XL at 495 reach, 452 RC. It's mainly a trip bike. My experience is that it always takes me a second to reacclimate to riding more centered but still getting plenty of weight into the front wheel, but once I've done that it feels awesome in the steeps and chunk. An additional upside for me is being able to run a higher bar (more comfortable generally; nice when it's really steep) because it's so much easier to weight the front..
  • 3 1
 what size was your meta? the chainstays on my medium TR 29 felt short to begin with, but now I have gotten used to it I enjoy it on the tighter corners. Not sure I would feel the same on a larger size though...
  • 21 0
 @seatsniffer4 I agree. The front center/rear center balance on the SX is incredible, I feel they didn't really do it justice in describing the cornering characteristics. Yes it feels great going straight, but they made it sound like it doesn't like to corner and I have had a completely different experience. Because of the long chainstays, the bike is sooo forgiving in high speed cornering, and it will start drifting at the edge of traction rather than losing front wheel grip, which for me, is incredible, the cornering confidence is amazing, and I have been able to just shlap corners sooo hard on this bike. That being said, of course the downside to that is super tight lower speed corners but who really gives a F*$& about those.
  • 2 1
 Same reach, same chainstay (in L), same bb drop as my Switch 6 and thats 2 years old, so on trend. Now if you want a long chainstay look at the Stage 6, 469mm.

On this bike at least if you get the S or M you get a 442 not 447 of the L/XL.
  • 1 0
 I'm sure that the confidence across off camber roots Alicia was commenting on is due to the long chainstays.
  • 6 2
 Definitely. There is really no downside to a moderately long chainstays...438-445. So much better in every respect. I won't even consider bikes with stubby chainstays.
  • 3 0
 @foggnm: 100% agree
One bike is 445 and my other is 460
For riding XLs, they made a MASSIVE difference in how well the bike corners!
  • 1 0
 I also agree, I had a 2021 Meta TR in Large and the back would always try and break free prematurely, to much forward weight bias, the CS length prob perfect for Medium or smaller sizes. I actually emailed Commencal and asked if they were going to release new chainstays, they said no but would take the feedback into upcoming bikes.
  • 1 0
 Wait a minute what's the bb drop? It says "bb height 4" what does that mean? +4mm? If so it's a fail imo.
  • 2 3
 Only a complaint because it's a mullet! They're supposed to have shorter 275 rear ends to help them ride snappy. A big long chain stay defeats that concept... If it was a full 29er it'd be totally fine.
  • 2 0
 @mybaben: This basically makes it an out and out race bike IMO
  • 37 7
 A long rear end is not a negative/con. This bike is a bruiser enduro race bike for stability and speed, not freeride minded. Poor classification imo there.
  • 16 3
 There a ton of riders out there (myself included) who like long travel bikes but aren't necessarily trying to just go as fast as possible in a straight line. I personally wouldn't buy this bike because having ridden quite a few different enduro bikes, I always prefer the ones with shorter chainstays. If I could design my own frame I would make them as short as physically possible without causing any clearance issues etc..
  • 14 1
 Everything is a trade off, there is no better or worse.
  • 4 2
 It's a con for me!
  • 4 2
 @its-joe: Try a Wreckoning. Still fast, but more about play than race. And the most shapes in the air 29er I've thrown a leg over.
  • 2 0
 @its-joe: So buy the Clash...
  • 3 4
 @DylanH93: thanks Captain Obvious!
(:
  • 8 2
 Enduro race bikes need to be quick in tight corners. Straight line composure alone is not enough to make a good enduro race bike at the higher levels.
  • 10 4
 @Ttimer: Last time I checked my bike did not corner, I cornered on it that's a huge difference. You just need more input and some technique adjustment and you can corner any bike, cs length is just a tradeoff.
  • 2 1
 @lkubica: Well, think of any negative characteristic of any bike, and I can equally cancel you with a "just need more" comment. You ride the bike, it's not the bike that rides you. Right?
  • 1 2
 It's a con only because it's a mullet. Full 29er would be totally fine with that size.
  • 1 0
 @its-joe: there's still freeride bikes out there
  • 25 2
 I have this bike, it is a climbing goat, there are some technical parts that I havent been able to climb with my fast paced XC bike, with the Meta i slowly climb through them no problem.

It is the only bike that i enjoy both the uphills and the downhills. Roadclimbing might be a bit boring, but if you start slowly and start increasing the pace little by little, putting the extra weight on the momentum/inercia of the bike a pedalstrike at a time, the last meters of your climb you will be sprinting.

Is like a Locomotive, heavy but mighty powerfull.
  • 25 1
 With what's happening to the supreme in terms of the frame cracking, I hope this doesn't follow suit
  • 6 1
 The problem is that these reviews are always way too short to find out about these problems. You'd need some long term testing and probably someone like Paul Aston to find out about the cracking frames. I'd love to see more honest long term reviews because that's what counts for me
  • 14 5
 I emailed Pinkbike about this issue to see if they would like to share my videos as I believe there is a rider safety concern: riders not knowing that their bike might be slowly developing issues and they might not know about it. Zero response, and the same from 15x other top publications.
  • 1 2
 @astonmtb:
I have the Ohlins Sx in medium on order. Should I be concerned? If so what would you do if you was in this position?
  • 26 4
 36lbs really isn't that heavy
  • 5 0
 Compared to what?
  • 140 0
 @nozes: 37lbs
  • 27 0
 @Gerlewis: the math checks out.
  • 10 10
 It most certainly is if you have to pedal up anything
  • 22 0
 @nozes: Your mom......couldn't help myself!!
  • 1 3
 Do you remember there are some DH bikes that weigh?
  • 3 5
 My shore is about 40lbs, and it is fine for me. No complaints. People focus on weight too much.
  • 4 1
 @norfiril: dh bikes dont have droppers, dont need cassetes or drivetrains
  • 14 0
 I’ve been considering both the Meta SX and the Patrol so the comparison discussion was super helpful. On the geo charts I’ve noticed is that Meta SX bb seems unusually high where the Patrol is quite low. In the field tests was this a noticeable difference between those bikes?
  • 11 1
 It may not feel as agile as other bikes on first impression, but I'm sure once you've ridden it for a while, you get used to it and learn how to maneuver through the tight stuff. Seems like excellent value, too.
  • 13 1
 Can’t wait to ride mine!
  • 3 0
 You’ll love it. Built mine a few months ago after my meta am was stolen. It feels way more agile than the am.
  • 11 0
 I thought Commencal was from Andorra?
  • 2 0
 There we go.
  • 15 8
 My knee-jerk reaction when I saw the name of this bike was, "eeww, SX is hot garbage". Then I realize that's not what SX stood for. I feel like that was a miss on the market department. Might as well call their next trail bike the Meta Reverb.
  • 5 0
 Or the Meta Eggbeater. Or the Meta Juicy. Or the Meta Elixir.
  • 5 0
 Sounds like a great bike for the price/what it is.

The review is great as while it's short, it gives a good sense of the pros and cons. I'm looking for a bike on the lighter/more agile side of enduro (or heavier duty trail), so this bike probably isn't for me despite the great spec and this review lets me decide that.
  • 5 0
 I had the 2020 AM 29 model in a large but for 2021 went with the medium since they drastically changed the reach and top tube lengths. For a 5'10" person the medium does not feel too long or stretched out in anyway. It changes direction well. I'm sure my opinion would be different if I rode the large though, that's why I got the medium and I'm happy with it. The numbers related to the size large didn't make since for me since I do not contend for landspeed records. For someone my size I believe there could be a significant difference in the performance feedback of the frame depending on which size you pick.
  • 3 3
 Im 5’6 and with a 30mm stem the 470mm reach is perfect. Steep, rough or fast it really shines
  • 3 0
 I'm 5'10-11" on a 2021 Medium AM 29 as well. I feel like the balance is great. I could maybe lose 10mm of reach but I feel like my arms aren't that long. I could see how the Large/XL would start getting a little out of wack, but for the Medium I dig this bike. It seems weird she picked the Large to test honestly.
  • 2 1
 I'm 6' tall and I ride an S3 Stumpjumper Evo with 445 reach and high rise bars. That's the same reach as the Small Meta AM. The Stumpy is beyond stable at steep and on steeps and even with the HT raked out to 63.5 is incredibly agile. Shorter reach and a slack front end is the most fun combo on steep or tight terrain.
  • 1 0
 I’m 6 foot and had a AM in large with 35mm bars. I did few like I would have fit the medium a bit better than the large. It felt like a bit of a bus on the north shore. Sadly that bike was stolen after a few rides and I had to build a SX if I wanted a bike quickly. I stayed with the large and surprisingly it felt sooo much more nimble and fit is perfect. I immediately felt more comfortable on the sx. So stoked on this bike, and lucky to live close to their store up in Squamish
  • 4 0
 I built up a SX recently, mainly because I could seamlessly swap most all the important bits to get a rig going ASAP and without killing the bank account. I agree with PB's take on the bike. Not fast going up, but with the right set of legs and lungs, it can climb anything, fireroads to technical singletrack. Point it down, and it's extremely confidence inspiring. For my application, steep and technical decents, it fits the bikes DNA. My first alloy bike in a while and I like it, never wished it was made from carbon. Good looking bike, built like a tank (and feels like it), hope it provides me years of service of saving my ass from bad line choices and riding above my paygrade. Wish it had a threaded BB though.
  • 3 0
 100% accurate description. The weight took some getting used to coming from a 2022 Bronson, but the SX feels so much better charging down hill.
  • 1 0
 great review, im in the market and about to purchase a SX frame. how tall are you and what size do you run? any issues with the bike since this original post?
  • 1 0
 @dandunne13: 5'10" 170lbs riding a medium SX. Right on the border between sizes but very happy with the medium. Feel like the size large would make it harder to get in the air. My build came in at 36.7 lbs but feel like it climbs almost as good as my 2022 Sentinel GX Carbon that is 3+ lbs lighter. The SX has been solid for the last 6 months including some hard days at the bike park, no issues to speak of.
  • 1 0
 @dandunne13: I am 5'6" or about 168cm. I went with a Medium. It's actually a little long for my size, but I do like the stability it offers when it gets fast and bumpy. I handle it ok just fine in the air and technical and tight climbs.....I just won't be doing any PR on the climbs. No issues with the frame and it's used regularly on some pretty technical stuff....but I am a lighter ride so not too hard on equipment except when I make mistakes. I just wish it had a threaded BB because my home-made pressfit BB installer sometimes doesn't get the BB alignment just right and I can throw a BB pretty quick.
  • 5 0
 I've been looking at this in Keswick Green with yellow Ohlins bits and wish I had a spare 8k just laying around. Damn family spending all my money!
  • 1 0
 Got this on order!
Size medium (5ft8 )
I'm still hearing more good things than negative about this bike. Only wish ohlins would hurry up and send the forks so they can send it and I get on it. November can't come quick enough!
  • 2 16
flag MattP76 (Aug 19, 2022 at 16:02) (Below Threshold)
 Ive always loved Commencal. Until they utter fadded thier bikes. A stinking fad Mullet fad. In time people will realise what a fad Mullet Bikes are. A total utter stinker of a fad!!! Time will prove me right Tick tock tick tock!.........
  • 4 0
 @MattP76: i wouldnt say theyre a fad all the fastest wc guys are on mullets only persons whose not is greg. Its all personal preference
  • 2 1
 @MattP76: Hi.
I've rode bikes all my childhood and onwards and rode both 27.5 and currently on a 29er.
Having sampling both current size wheels I have found that on the same trails I rode 27.5 and now 29 I definitely buzz my butt on super steep stuff I didn't on 27.5 but also found the 29er "feels" quicker but slower in the turns.
My strava and race times on more blast it runs have got quicker but twisty trails,stages no significant change.
So I'm looking forward to seeing what this Meta SX is going to "feel" and ride like as I had a absolute blast on my old nomad and also love my current Marin Alpine Trail.
Jury is out but at 5ft 8 mullet could be my Goldilocks.
Oh also when the shorter elite riders switched to mullet from 29er(Danny Hart,Try Brosnan,Loci Bruni) it's made me wonder what if?
  • 4 1
 Sounds perfect for someone wanting the stability of a big 29er while ticking the on trend style box and crack clearance of an mullet.

I know there was a whole review, but would love to konw how the team enjoyed the new control tyres in those conditions?
  • 16 0
 The new Continental tires work great. I'm pretty picky when it comes to tire choice, especially in the wet, and I'd happily run these year round in the PNW, maybe switching to an Argotal up front when things get extra muddy. I raced on a set for that Stone King Rally too, and they held up really well to all the pointy rocks.
  • 2 0
 @mikekazimer: Thank you, sound like they'd play very well in the UK!

Stone King sounded like a great event, if you can do it again next year borrow the Pinkbike Racing film crew, bring us some racing before the worldcup season begins.Add live tracking too, so we can follow your bike's world tour while you're racing a Btwin.
  • 2 1
 @mikekazimer:Thats good to hear. They all seem to have them in stock most places and they are $50-60 not $80-100 like Maxxis. I couldn't find Dh casing maxis tires anywhere so i grabbed some Contis for almost half the price. I haven't mounted them yet.
  • 2 0
 @mikekazimer: Are these the enduro casing version? Also are you guys running the Front and Rear versions of the kryptotal? Are they the 2.4"?
  • 3 0
 @mikekazimer question for ya, you spent a lot of time on the Meta AM 29 and seemed to get along really well with that bike, but at some point said you would like to see how it feels with longer chainstays. It seems like Commencal pretty much answered with this bike. How would you compare the two, and do you feel the pros of the longer chainstays outweigh the cons when comparing to the AM 29, where otherwise geometry numbers are pretty much identical?
  • 5 1
 Still love this format! Thanks @mikekazimer @mikelevy @alicaleggett and @mattbeers

Can you share the trails that you rode the bikes on? and the trail you used to do the timed laps?
  • 3 0
 Not sure about timing, but those trails were double back diamond and double down in the Chuckanuts.
  • 3 0
 When I was looking at buying either a new Meta TR or a second hand Bronson I spoke to my neighbour (pro rider) and they said the Meta was a great bike as long as you wanted to be going balls to the wall all the time, every ride. Is this true of the SX too?
  • 1 0
 I've had the meta sx and I do find it to be a bike that wants to be pushed. It feels okay on days where I ride a bit more conservatively, and feels amazing when I ride hard. It's a bit of work to keep it moving if it's relatively flat.
  • 21 18
 What's the point of a mullet with 450mm chainstays? You're missing out on that pop and agility of a short rear end built around a 27.5 rear wheel. You might as well go full 29er at that length.
  • 36 5
 You do gain rear wheel to butt clearance, which comes in handy on steep trails. I've also found that it's easier to pick up and move the back end in the steeps, even with the longer chainstays.
  • 12 8
 This. Seems like you're forgoing one of the greatest benefits of a mullet with such a long rear end.
  • 17 2
 The rotational mass of the 29 vs the 275 is what makes the biggest difference. Hold a 275 and 29 in your hand while they are spinning at 15 mph and then move them side to side and you will see the difference. The 275 is much easier to move around because the weight is closer to the center of rotation plus slightly lighter because there is less material.
  • 17 2
 @mikekazimer: I agree. Wheel-to-butt clearance is a real issue with full 29ers. Increasingly so for me that I consider a mullet for my next bike because of this alone.
  • 8 2
 @mikekazimer: Is butt clearance mostly an issue for tall/long-legged people? I'm 5'9" with a pretty short inseam and it seems like I never get that close to my tire on my 29ers.
  • 17 1
 @fentoncrackshell, I'd actually say it's more of an issue for shorter riders - that's why so many of the smaller World Cup DH racers are on mullet bikes these days. Trail steepness and rear wheel travel are two other factors that play into how close that wheel gets.
  • 3 1
 @fentoncrackshell: I am 5'11 with very long legs and still sometimes have this issue in "oh shit" moments and some very slow techy moves. Definitely not a big problem but consequences of this could be really bad.
  • 2 0
 @fentoncrackshell: I am five 11 and have grazed the rear tile a couple of times. It’s a problem mostly on very steep sections of trail especially when terrain or g force causes the suspension to compress
  • 3 2
 Yes, people down voting this don't understand the concept of a mullet!
  • 3 1
 Easy to ride fast, affordable, sturdy. Not a daily driver abut a great tool for a privateer racer.

Can’t help wondering how differently the same bike would ride with a 29/29 setup. Only needing one size spare rims/tires/wheels counts for a lot….
  • 7 0
 The top Enduro guys seem to like full 29 if they are tall enough
  • 1 0
 @CFR94: Yeah-just for crack clearance I see running a mixed setup if you're under 170cm or so. Otherwise I can see it for a playbike (ligher rear wheel, even with longer chainstays) but not a race bike.

I'd love to see the data on speed for mullet vs. 29er. Likely inconclusive at best.
  • 6 4
 I was so near to ordering one but there are numerous threads out there of people having a truly miserable time with Commencals warranty, enough to put me off when spending such a lump. Shame, heart still wants one, but think head has made the right call.
  • 6 0
 Not sure where you're located but Commencal Canada has been great to deal with.
  • 10 0
 @ekimox: My guess is the UK
  • 2 2
 These days that's everyone's warranty. Bike companies aren't as willing to honor warranties, the bikes are burlier and ridden harder so stuff like cracked welds or stress cracks in the carbon is a lot more common.
  • 2 0
 Its the downside of direct brands for sure. Sometimes its great...often times its just not. The price is still probably worth it on the Commencal, but the other brands its not even worth it anymore IMO as the price savings does not outweigh the inability to have shop support.
  • 2 3
 @wyorider: I disagree. Do google search for Commencal warranty, do a search on the forum here too. Then do the same with a couple of other brands. Disproportionate number against Commencal, now I'm not saying it's a scientifically sound way of comparing, but I read enough to make me think twice.
  • 1 0
 @wyorider: Naw. I had an issue with my 2022 Trek Fuel Ex 8 and they took care of it right away. Parts were overnighted and I was riding that weekend.
  • 3 0
 Here in Germany, the Commencal warranty departement is just great
  • 2 0
 I love my META TR29. Best riding bike I had in a loong time. But what I really do not understand: Why they keep using pressfit. I had to change my BB already 3 times because its so unprecise. I wish they would add that dollar to manufacturing and make it threaded!
  • 2 0
 I have a 2018 Meta V4.2 XL 27.5 and have change everything out but the headset, incredible bike wouldn’t trade it for anything out there except for the SX. Big bike 29” front will soak up anything in your way, I would switch to a coil on the rear.
  • 2 0
 Coming from the transition spire (stolen) I didn’t find the Commencal Meta Sx to be hard to turn at all - thought it was a little easier actually. Of course the spire is absolutely massive so that’s to be expected, but I think the Meta sx is perfect for steep gnarly terrain!
  • 4 0
 Why is the geo chart not included in this article?
That seems like very important information.
  • 3 2
 So if the reviewers state that due to the long chainstays, it doesn't feel snappy or nimble, then what is the point of the mullet setup? Simply for bum clearance? I thought the point of the mullet was to get the "roll over" advantage of a 29er up front and the snappy cornering ability of a 27.5" rear wheel.
  • 5 1
 it would appear Commencal has negated some of the benefits in search of others. Shorter people who ride really steep, fast terrain will probably love it. For taller people on tight trails there's probably not much added benefit when compared to full 29 with short chainstays. Perhaps goes to show there's no perfect bike, especially when making one for different size riders.
  • 5 3
 This bike is plenty agile.
Anyone who has ever moved there bar height higher or lower can tell you it’s not the “bike” so much as it is the set up.
This goes for everything.
Figure it out.
  • 4 3
 Just looked up the prices for the other versions and I'm stunned. The cheapest Meta SX costs 3.400€. That's direct to consumer and an alloy frame equipped with lowest-end components. Commencal bikes are actually terrible value these days.
  • 1 0
 For posterity, picked one of these up as a Sea to Sky trail bike. XL for my 6'2 (6'3 arms, 35" inseam); ETT on the L was too short for climbing. Coming from a Carbon Sentinel (435mm stays), on the XL, the longer stays (445mm) are much more predictable/balanced. Loved my Sentinel and got used to its style (all over the front wheel), but the Meta SX fits me better, to the point that I extended the stays on my Sender Mullet as well (435-445). It is heavy and long, but as others have said, she cruises up tech and fire roads at her own pace; I do climb a fair bit but have legs and lungs and don't mind suffering. On the downs its a mini-DH bike; f*cking rad, eats chunk, but supportive enough to get airborne. Reminds me of a charger ski; has a min speed (walking pace), but above that it gives no f*cks, and corners great. Don't buy it for flat land, but for steep ups and downs, no complaints. And the spec on the Team needs nothing (save maybe a bar), the value is there. Carbon Patrol may be my next bike down the line once there's a RS version available.
  • 1 0
 Coming off a transition sentinel the bike definitely felt more cumbersome and slower to turn. Threw a 31mm length stem on and 780mm deity bars with 38mm rise and it’s a whole new bike. Rails berms and sends jumps like a dream.
  • 1 0
 Thanks for this. Went a similar route and it completely cleaned up the slow speed handling. When in between sizes, move the chart. Also find myself cleaning techy climbs at an alarming rate, like Grave Digger in his prime. Could be New Bike Syndrome.
  • 6 5
 Why have Commencal created a mullet bike with long chainstays? Isn't this counterintuitive? The benefit of the smaller wheel (cornering/flickability etc) is mitigated by the chainstay length which makes the bike "stable".
  • 7 1
 The long stays are to make it feel more balanced in corners.
  • 1 0
 I see what you say.. but fixing all variables, , 29/27.5 corners way better than full 29er.. (tried on a Spire)...
  • 2 6
flag powpowpow (Aug 19, 2022 at 14:02) (Below Threshold)
 They will return to full 29ers…
  • 4 1
 @powpowpow: that's a hell of a claim.
  • 6 1
 @powpowpow: definently not look at commencals pro riders, all of them are of mullet
  • 4 3
 @panaphonic: It’s a very reasonable claim that Commencal will make full 29er bikes in the future.

Amaury Pierron won two World Cups this year on a full 29er setup. The Supreme V5 is 29er compatible. And Commencals new prototype Enduro race bike is also being raced as a full 29er setup. The next version of the Meta will be shorter and steeper, but it will likely be a full 29er.

It makes sense. For all out speed, 29ers are still superior after all.
  • 3 0
 @Muscovir: More like it will be a new Meta AM, Sx will stay as mullet
  • 2 0
 @mikekazimer Do you remember what rear shock settings you landed on with this bike that you liked? Also, was it an LL shock tune? Thanks!
  • 4 0
 @mikekazimer Good that somebody finally noticed problem with RS shocks and rebound. The bad news is that whatever rebound tune you get it may still be too slow. This is because there is a platform built in permanently into rebound stack. So that bikes pedal great but the rebound works from a certain threshold force and so the shock is prone to packing. The most ironic thing is that they call it rapid recovery. No other company makes shocks with this kind of architecture. There are third party tuning kits which remove this feature and the difference is night and day.
  • 2 0
 @lkubica: Chance you have a link to those tuning kits? I have the same shock on my Scor. Could be interested in checking it out
  • 2 0
 @bman33: Email the guy from nsr-racing.co they have a poor site but sold me the complete rs SuperDeluxe coil kit + a new bumper. Paul Aston uses those practically on all his bikes.
  • 2 0
 "Steal in today's bike market"...huh, it's a buyer's market nowadays in southern California (2nd hand-lots of covid buyers selling)
  • 3 0
 That settles it, I'm going for this over the Clash.
  • 1 0
 The clash is an awesome bike tho, I don’t regret buying it at all. 27.5 front and back, but people do mullet them with no issues, Plus it’s basically 2 bikes in one with the flip chip.
  • 4 1
 I'm looking forward to the intense!
  • 1 0
 seems fast. Did @alicialeggett race this to the win in whistler, or a Revel ?
  • 1 0
 @Lagr1980: If i understood correctly it sounds like her fastest time was the Intense.
  • 2 1
 Why put a 27.5 rear wheel on there and NOT make the chain stay shorter? you gain butt clearance, but lose roll over speed and quick cornering.
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer if you do a future bham field test and want to have a benchmark for how well it corners you could back to back to back on bobs with each bike.
  • 10 8
 How in the world is a $5,800 bike considered "inexpensive"?!
  • 9 1
 When comparably spec'ed bikes in the same class from other brands cost $1500-$2000 more.
  • 8 0
 It's less expensive.
  • 4 0
 @bman33: which brands? I just looked, and similar speced Specialized Enduro with a carbon front triangle has an MSRP of 400usd less! And that MSRP has to cover the cost of a dealer. That Commencal is overpriced for a direct-to-consumer brand.
  • 1 0
 Agreed
  • 6 0
 @taldfind: TBF, the Meta SX Team (the one the test bike is closest to) has nicer suspension, brakes and wheels than the Enduro you're referring to and retails for $5,300: www.commencalusa.com/commencal-meta-sx-team-2022-c2x33305149
  • 3 1
 @zamanfu: That is true, but the enduro still has the more expensive, carbon frame, so I do think they are fairly compared to one another. The Meta SX you linked has suspension, brakes, and wheels that are about $1,500 more expensive that those parts found on the Enduro I mentioned. I've done some quick math to find the average price difference between carbon and aluminum frames, from brands that make both options for some or all their models, and that comes out to about $1,500.

If Commencal was a LBS sold brand, then I wouldn't feel that the Meta SX is overpriced, but it is a DTC brand, which should come with a nice big price cut. But it didn't, so I think it is overpriced.
  • 1 0
 @taldfind: Australian comparison: The Meta Ohlins Edition costs $8,800 here. The Enduro LTD has the same suspension, equivalent groupset and worse wheels but costs $11,500.
  • 1 0
 @boozed: Yeah, it really seems to me that the Team Edition (the one the test model is based on) is the only one that has LBS price, most of the rest of the Meta SX line up looks to keep the DTC price.
  • 1 0
 Anyone know if putting 27.5 forks and front wheel on this would work? Or ruin it?
  • 15 13
 But does it crack?
  • 9 1
 Almost certainly, bikes from all brands crack, just some more easily than others
  • 1 0
 I may have missed it...what size was tested???
  • 2 1
 Size large.
  • 1 0
 www.commencalusa.com/commencal-meta-sx-signature-alc-xl-c2x37553270

L. 1286WB
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer: Did you have the flip chip in the high or low setting?
  • 1 1
 just ask @astonmtb about the long (longest ever?) chainstay's pros and cons. he's got some experience with that...
  • 5 4
 The Meta would look great in carbon be much lighter.
  • 1 2
 Testing a bike in that kind of weather would be pointless to me...but I live in the desert...so am not usually riding in wet weather.
  • 1 1
 13:50 Watch his face when she says "nimbility...?" What did she just say? LOL
  • 1 0
 Giving enough days in between the other reviews? @mikekazimer @mikelevy
  • 1 1
 Haven't changed the frame in a decade...garbage bearings... garbage aluminum.. garbage company
  • 3 5
 37+LBS with pedals. Add in some liners and... WTAF? Literally, there are several high end flyweight E-bikes that come in at, or below this.
  • 11 0
 I refuse to weigh it, but I'm pretty confident my XL, 29" aluminum RM Slayer (upgraded to a Zeb, 650lb spring, 220mm rotor and Maxxis Assegai (DD) and DHRII (DH)) is well over 40lbs.

Don't even care. It sparks joy.
  • 1 0
 @jsnfschr: how much do you weigh? I have a Meta power with a 600lb spring and weigh in at 215 and can't bottom it sending it to flat.
  • 2 0
 @pcloadletter: I'm 6'4 and have dropped down to 255, but was hovering between 290-300 when I bought it. Ha ha.
  • 2 4
 Only thing slower than a "heavy" bike is pushing a cracked bike. Only thing worse than riding a "heavy" bike is getting denied on a warranty claim on a "light" carbon enduro frame. If you race XC AND you're under 10% body fat AND you can sustain 3-4 watts/kg of power for a while weight matters. If not, the reliable bike is the fastest bike.
  • 1 1
 "the least expensive bike we tested" LOL
  • 2 2
 $6k USD is alot for a bus ticket.
  • 1 1
 What’s next the Meta Deore with X01 components?
  • 13 15
 Cheapest bike in the test at 6 grand. Me thinks PB may be a bit out of touch with what the average rider's budget is.
  • 7 2
 www.pinkbike.com/news/video-value-bike-field-test-welcome-2022-full-suspension-hardtails.html
  • 5 2
 @k2theg: Yeah, I've seen that. But that's one extreme to the other. How about "Enduro bike test in the 3500-7000 dollar range? That's more in the realm of most people I know anyways.
  • 4 0
 @tmwjr777: there is a build for $3200 USD.
  • 3 2
 @k2theg: Yes, I am aware. But PB has a tendancy to review models that are the top or second tier spec.
  • 4 2
 I mean, I get it. The bike companies send PB higher speced models so they can't get a feel for the full potential of that particular frame. But, let's face it, most of us are usually buying a more mid-spec model
  • 5 2
 @tmwjr777: except when they do a value bike field test. Can't please everybody I guess.
  • 12 1
 @tmwjr777: Do you think it would really differ? Most of these bikes (save maybe the exotic high pivots) are available in builds in that price range. The component specs for each is pretty similarly stepped and I doubt many people could really feel an acute difference between GX and X01 or Fox Factory and Performance elite anyway. The top of the line bikes might be nicer, but they're nicer in the same way, so reviewing them against one another will still give us a decent understanding of the pros and cons.

For example: This bike is a slowish, but capable climber. It's long chainstays lead to it being stable and fast, but more of a plow bike than being agile poppy. The cheaper version would likely ride very similarly, but be a bit heavier and maybe a bit less tuneable. You still know it's basic characteristics. The one area it would benefit is the weight, as if the other bikes were lower end builds, they'd be closer, but if I'm reading correctly, it's the whole package no just the actual weight number that leads to the feel you get.
  • 2 2
 @MarcusBrody: Yeah, I get what you're saying. I just find it strange that they tend to review bikes that are very high end, or very low end. Not hating on PB. Just an observation.
  • 2 0
 Man I feel good. My NP mega was $2200 delivered. Last check they were 2400.
www.chainreactioncycles.com/mobile/us/en/nukeproof-mega-275-comp-alloy-bike-deore-2021/rp-prod196141
  • 2 0
 @tmwjr777: yes, I agree, but I think you get a good idea of how the bike rides from these reviews regardless of the build. The suspension kinematics and geometry is the same regardless of the build which I think are the most important factors in how a bike handles. Just me 2 cents.
  • 1 1
 @tmwjr777: dude just use your imagination a little bit. It's not like they reviewed some $12k wonderbike and spent the whole review raving about the weight and the electronic suspension or whatever. I don't think anyone would call a $6500 bike "the very high end", even if that is one of Commencal's top spec levels.

The review does a pretty good job covering the character of the bike as @MarcusBrody is saying... if the only thing changing is the build kit then it's pretty easy to figure out what tradeoffs you're making at a different price point.
  • 2 0
 @tmwjr777: How many car mags do you see test the 'cheap stuff'? Almost none. Sounds nice, but articles with the high end bikes appear (probably some metrics out there) to get vastly more interaction which is what advertisers want
  • 1 0
 @bman33: www.ericpetersautos.com

Sold me on a Corolla with the base trim!
(Not really, I love my van and hope they bury me in it together with all my kashima trimmed bikes. But EP is the man and his site is the only place I go for car news these days).
  • 2 0
 @tmwjr777: that and we are all smart/cynical enough to know bike of the year probably isnt going to the Deore/SLX test mule if another company had sent an XTR build
  • 21 24
 I’m looking forward to 2025 when everyone agrees that mullet bikes were just another 27.5+ style fad.
  • 6 8
 That just can't come soon enough
  • 19 5
 Said like someone who is scared of their full 29er becoming "less cool"
  • 14 0
 I don't think this is gonna be a fad. Mullet bikes have already had success racing, where plus tires never made to EWS or WC podiums.
  • 7 1
 Some of us really dont gel with the way full 29 enduro bikes ride. Going mullet on my Spec Enduro was the best thing I ever did. Slightly more hang up, but the rearward travel and fact I dont have to wrestle as much in tight corners more than make up for it
  • 2 1
 Can you even buy 275+ anymore? I still think they are a good option for the rear on ebikes.
  • 4 1
 @misteraustin: nah man, I’m 40 and have 2 kids. I know I’m not cool.
  • 2 12
flag Muscovir FL (Aug 19, 2022 at 15:23) (Below Threshold)
 This. There is no point what so ever for mixed wheels on a size L or XL frame. The end of the mullet fad can’t come soon enough.
  • 8 1
 Dirt bikes have been running mixed wheel sizes for decades. Works for them.
  • 7 1
 @Muscovir: as someone 6'1" and quite skinny/not super strong, I cant disagree with this statement enough. Wrestling with my full 29 Enduro through slower, chunky corners was brutal and I got tired of having to come in wide and ride the whole corner. I went mullet and the ability to sneak in corners late or out of them early was really nice to have back. Both for when you're tired or off your line and because the agility is pretty dang fun
  • 1 6
flag Muscovir FL (Aug 19, 2022 at 23:12) (Below Threshold)
 @JiminOz: That’s actually not true. Dirtbike tires usually have the same or very close to the same outer diameter. The rear wheel as a whole isn’t actually smaller, it’s just a larger tire on a smaller rim. On a dirt bike this makes sense because of traction but that’s the only advantage of this configuration.
  • 4 0
 @Muscovir: Two inches difference in wheel sizes, three inches if you go back a few years.

So it's correct. Tyres might be bigger profiles, but the wheels are very different.
  • 3 0
 @peterman1234: The Spec Enduro's "rearward travel" isn't significantly more rearward than any of its peers.
Below threshold threads are hidden







Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv42 0.080188
Mobile Version of Website