I do wonder whether they've got a high pivot bike in the works, similar to their DH bike. As they're only working with alloy, they may have this in place pretty quickly
Yeah I am really hoping this happens.
I'm not convinced, for a DH bike o super long travel enduro bike, so makes sense for the AM. Hope the tr stays the same, don't think they work so well on short travel bikes.
What do you guys think? Is it safe to buy used meta 29:er?
I guess the warranty is only for first owner but is there any kind of crash replacementbor anything like that if the frame cracks?
There's no crash replacement, but I'd have no hesitation buying a used Meta IF it checked out. If you don't know how to check a used bike over, do you have a friend that can help you? Commencal are great for carrying a large inventory of spare frame parts. I personally wouldn't buy anything that has been stripped or re-painted.
I do wonder whether they've got a high pivot bike in the works, similar to their DH bike. As they're only working with alloy, they may have this in place pretty quickly
They used to have one. The last year they sold it was 2018. It was call the Supreme SX.
I own a 2021 supreme. High pivot isn't always better. Personally I do not want a high pivot trail bike. I prefer a more playful and responsive ride for an Enduro bike. High pivot does the opposite. Absolutely mind blowing for plowing through rock gardens and the chunkiest trails, but terrible when it comes to jumps and overall responsiveness.
I now find myself doubting my decision to get a Meta AM 29 (already on order for several months) seeing as they have essentially been replaced by the SX. It feels like I would be buying into something that apparently wasn’t quite right and needed to be “corrected” with the SX. I saw the reddit thread referenced above but wanted to see if there are any further opinions on this? Thanks!
The Meta AM was already a long travel bike. The current trend for enduro bikes is mullet so i wouldn't say there is anything wrong with the current Meta AM.
I would keep my 29"AM even if someone offers me SX instead. I'm in love with it. And, yes, it's a Large. That unbalanced one how that idiotic review in Enduro magazine said.
Yes, rear centre could be longer but overall it's a huge bike and longer CS would make it even more huge.
If you want to ride it like a trail bike, you have to be active. If you're riding it actively, you don't need a longer CS. Actually, it's better this way.
As for the smaller rear wheel.. I don't see the need for it. It won't make the bike more manageable because you get also a longer CS and the butt clearance is not an issue. Maybe if I would ride a Small size..
Thanks for your answers. I’m on the shorter side so would be going for a size S, which adds to the doubt of getting an AM 29 instead of the SX, but realistically I wouldn’t get a similar build SX until at least next summer with how things are going (realistically I think it will be a year from now) so it’s a tough choice. At the same time they left the TR as it is 29/29 so makes me wonder if the mullet setup is only “necessary” in their eyes for longer travel bikes, or if it seemingly didn’t work well for Enduro….
The SX offer makes sense to me as it clarifies the difference between it and the TR as a full enduro machine. I am over 6 feet and would not want a mullet (I ride a 2021 AM), and the changes in geo to accommodate the 27.5 wheels are a rounding error compared to stem and handlebar spec, seat angle and position, F-R suspension sag, etc. Also, the TR kept the exact same geo; food for thoughts. The feeling we get inside our guts seeing this all unveil is absolute marketing, unlike the major difference between 2020 and 2021 geos for the AM in my opinion, which were significative.
We are probably 2 or 3 years away from the TR having the 2021 AM travel and angles spec anyway, you heard it hear first
Those are some good points. I was also thinking the move to mullet was to differentiate the AM from the TR further, as almost every review says the TR is like a “mini-enduro”, it makes it quite tough to choose between the two, seems to be a lot of overlap. Also the travel on the TR does seem to be creeping up, as now there are a couple models with 160 in front. So I’d agree it was a move to push the AM frame further apart from the TR.
I’m seriously on the fence between a 2022 TR (version with 160 in front) or a 2021 AM - and perhaps that blurred area between the two is what Commencal wanted to get rid of by making the SX…