Commencal Launches Mixed-Wheel 2022 Meta SX

Oct 4, 2021
by Mike Kazimer  
Commencal Meta SX 2022


Commencal has added a mixed-wheel option into their Meta lineup with the next generation of the SX model. They're quick to point out that they're not just jumping on the bandwagon, since they've had mixed wheel DH bikes on race tracks for the last three years.

Like the Meta AM, the SX has 160mm of rear travel and a 170mm fork, but the geometry has been altered to accommodate the 27.5” rear wheel. Those changes include a 10mm shorter reach and 10mm longer chainstays – a size large now has a 485mm reach and 447mm chainstays. The head angle remains a relatively slack 63.6-degrees, and the seat tube angle is a steep 78.5-degrees.

Meta SX Details

• Aluminum frame
• Travel: 160mm / 170mm fork
• 29" front wheel, 27.5" rear
• 63.6-degree head angle
• 447mm chainstays
• Size: S, M, L, XL
• Price: $2,999 - $5,999 USD
commencal.com

Commencal Meta SX 2022
Commencal Meta SX 2022


Commencal Meta SX 2022

According to Commencal, the geometry numbers were chosen to give the bike a balanced feel, with good grip at both wheels. The usual reasoning for the two wheel sizes also apply here - the smaller rear wheel is meant to improve the bike's performance in the steeps by providing more room between the rider and the rear tire, while the larger front wheel is in place to keep the bike plowing right along.

When I reviewed the Meta TR 29 last year I mentioned that I wouldn't have minded slightly longer chainstays, or at least the option to experiment. It'll be interesting to give this version a try and see how the changes affect its handling. I'm also curious if the longer chainstays will end up on the next generation of the 29” Meta models.

There are six complete models of the Meta SX, all with aluminum frames of course, with prices starting at $2,999 for the SX Origin, and going up to $5,999 USD for the SX Signature.

Commencal Meta SX 2022
Meta SX Signature $5,999 USD.
Commencal Meta SX 2022
Meta SX Ohlins: $5,799 USD.

Commencal Meta SX 2022
Meta SX Team: $5,199 USD.
Commencal Meta SX 2022
Meta SX Essential:$3,999 USD.


Commencal Meta SX 2022
Meta SX Ride $3,299 USD
Commencal Meta SX 2022
Meta SX Origin $2,999 USD



Commencal Meta SX 2022
Meta Power SX Team: $7,599 USD.

There's also an SX version of the motorized Meta Power. In this case, the geometry adjustments include a longer reach and shorter chainstays compared to the version we recently reviewed in the most recent Field Test. The seat tube lengths are still on the longer side, but the 64-degree head angle and 78-degree seat tube angle are all on point for this style of eMTB.

Shimano's EP8 motor is powered by a 630Wh battery, which should provide enough juice for heading out on decently long rides without getting range anxiety.

There are four complete models, with prices ranging from $5,999 USD to $7,899 USD.

Commencal Meta SX 2022



Commencal Meta SX 2022
Meta Power SX Signature: $7,999 USD.
Commencal Meta SX 2022
Meta Power SX Essential: $6,599 USD.



231 Comments

  • 163 8
 Commencal is always killing it with these build kits and price points.
  • 34 1
 You got that right. That Essentials build looks like great.
  • 17 16
 price points arent special in the lower-end models only the top. tier 3 are ideal
  • 23 1
 @CrawfordMTB: Still, 3k USD for a bike is a very ‘affordable’ option compared to most other bike brands.
  • 15 0
 Look superb too! Big fan of Commencal's frames
  • 43 0
 Man we've become desensitized in a short period of time. SJ evo expert with x01 and performance elite suspension was $5k 12 months ago.
  • 4 0
 Killing it with the Geo too!
  • 30 2
 Big fan of Commencal too, but the cheaper builds are actually not that good value for money. Lots of sketchy low-end parts that need swapping out before they're truly ready to shred. I think I'd rather get a Propain.
  • 16 0
 @sspiff: That SJ evo expert @ $4800 was the best build/value I've seen in a long time. Even that bike is $6100 now
  • 11 2
 @sspiff: fake x01* having just the useless x01 part of the whole package doesn't make it an x01.
  • 5 0
 @sspiff: Don't you know it! I was looking at Commencal last year and their Origin was $2299, and the Ride was $2799. COVID inflation is insane!
  • 3 4
 Love commencal but I get to the seat tube length and it’s a deal breaker. What’s going on over there? Do they only have access to 120mm droppers?
  • 2 1
 @sspiff: yea but they couldn't fulfill their orders so it was useless having a nice bike at a nice price when it never came in...
(not full X01 either)
  • 3 2
 @theedon: 440mm seat tube is stupid on a medium. Their seat tubes are 20mm too long on all sizes but small.
  • 1 1
 @BenTheSwabian: What components are sketchy with the low-end builds?
  • 1 0
 @isaacgibson: big emphasis on the 'affordable'
  • 3 2
 4k for an alloy frame with slx and fox performance with a direct to customer sale: I have to disagree
  • 6 3
 Yeah not actually that great. And comparing to the usual North American suspects with their wild "boutique" prices doesn't help the market. 3k was considered a good middle of the road price some years ago for a very good compromise in price to performance, standard for Alu frame and mid-high end components, now it's considered budget. Crazy if you ask me. I don't just want to drop 3k on an "entry level" bike and I have a good job and live in a first world country. Commencal are one of the more expensive d2c brands out there, that being said they have a huge racing team focus and the bikes seem to work really well, I really don't want to say anything against the brand, just the market as a whole. If commencal can sell the bikes they'd be stupid to not ask higher prices.
  • 2 0
 @NicolaZesty314: gx chain, descendent crank, and guide rs brakes. Otherwise x01 derailleur, shifter, cassette. Not much to complain about.
  • 1 0
 @stiingya: Dunno... we got a couple in round these parts. There are two in my garage (wife's is slx though). Even at $6k the x01 model is good for the price.. at least in late 2021 terms. And the cassette and shifter are x01, so I don't know what there is to complain about on the build.
  • 1 0
 @sspiff: If your trying to say 21 Evo Experts were plentiful to buy I'd have to disagree? For sure there was a period there when they were available and if I would have drove to UT, AZ, or CO I might have got one in my size. And then despite lots of people saying they got a shop to sell and ship them a bike I couldn't find anyone who'd do it, not even a side deal...? Course I waited patently through winter on the bike I put money on at my local shop and by the time I gave up on that and started calling around they were slim pickens!

But I don't believe the 21 was full X01, I would swear it was just the derailleur fake out and the rest was GX. (which still wasn't a bad deal) But I will admit I could be wrong...? Smile
  • 5 2
 Hola @theedon, if you have a look at the specs tab on the website then you'll see that the droppers evolve by bike size: 125mm on S, 150mm on M, 175mm on L and 200mm on XL. Hope that helps!
  • 1 0
 @BenTheSwabian: If you believe that you atleast need GX or XT kits, yeah.

Im still happy with my sketchy NX kit ;-)
  • 2 1
 $3000 for the origin and they couldn't throw in a $100 dropper?
  • 1 0
 1000%…i love mine. Beat brand going
  • 1 0
 @theedon: @Ryan2949 This is only a problem for the e-bikes. An XL for example has a 460 seat tube on the ordinary Meta TR/AM/SX.
  • 1 0
 @pi-nebbenes: annnnnnnd I just realized that I was looking at the wrong GEO chart. Woops...
  • 2 0
 The large is 440. My range is 410. @pi-nebbenes:
  • 1 1
 @CrawfordMTB: That 3K bike will do everything for me that the top tier bike will do except impress people who are impressed with top tier bikes.
  • 2 0
 @femto505: Wheels, hubs, house-brand cockpit, two-piston brakes, disposable low-end SRAM drivetrains or Shimano 11-speed, some don't even come with droppers, low-end suspension parts, etc. Actually most parts except for the frame.

Rear shocks are the worst offenders though. For heavier/faster riders, the rear end of the Meta direly depends on adjustable low-speed compression to not feel like a wallowy mess. My friend has a '21 Meta that I set up for him. Stock tune on the stock rear shock felt completely off, way too light. Swapped it out for a SuperDeluxe Ultimate, had the shim stack changed for a heavier compression tune, closed off the LSC most of the way and voia la it felt decently supportive. That's why Öhlins shocks work so well with these bikes, they have a heavier damper tune / usually feel a lot more damped. Generally, shocks without adjustable compression damping shouldn't exist.
  • 1 0
 @BenTheSwabian: This base bike is mostly geared toward entry-level riders and not more seasoned riders. Over time an entry-level rider will develop a skill set to push the components to failure. But I always found Shimano components to be more durable than SRAM but can agree with your assessment of parts.
  • 1 0
 @COMMENCALbicycles: I ride size small and 125mm dropper would be deal breaker for me. Last time I built a bike, biggest requirement I had was minimum 150mm dropper.

It is the primary reason I like knolly over almost every other brand.
  • 56 17
 Are people actually wanting mixed wheel sized bikes, or is it just the industry attempting to find a way to get rid of 27.5 rims and tires????
  • 81 0
 I just mulleted my 2018 meta am 29er. I find that my slightly shorter inseam for a 5'8" human means my ass gets real friendly with 29er tires on steep shit. It's all about preference and your own build but maybe human corgis like me weren't made for long travel and a 29inch rear wheel.
  • 19 35
flag jaroh24 (Oct 4, 2021 at 9:54) (Below Threshold)
 It's going to be another one of those trends that all but dies out in 2 years. Just like plus-size wheels
  • 19 15
 I feel like the mullet-trend picked up some steam about a year ago, and has already lost momentum outside of DH racing. Looking at the top EWS racers, I don't think any of them are racing mullet. Most manufacturers are still releasing brand new enduro bikes...and MX configurations are only ever an "option", where the brand will basically slap a different rear end on their new frameset. Meanwhile, few reviewers are picking up the MX version for reviews/testing, and I have to believe that the resale value of MX frames will be a risk...

The simple fact is this: there is always a trade off. A 27.5" rear wheel may offer a slight improvement to maneuverability or agility, but it's going to trade this for less tire contact patch (cornering grip, braking performance), rolling inertia, and rollover. Assuming your butt isn't getting buzzed constantly, or you don't spend the majority of your day on jump trails, the tradeoff for MX probably isn't that interesting to the vast majority of mountain bikers - especially not the more causal crowds that don't spend their free time on Pinkbike. Smile
  • 9 5
 Difference in overall height between a 275 and 29 is around 40mm. While that might give some a tiny little edge to get their ass as low as possible on the really steep stuff, plenty of WCDH riders are riding really steep stuff, suspension bouncing off the bumpers, on 29" bikes.

A lot of this comes down the pros vs cons. If your riding butt-rubbing steep stuff every day all day, then yea, by all means, search for the bike that does it best.

On the other hand, if that butt-rub is only 1% of your total ride time, why sacrifice the other 99% of your average ride?
  • 18 0
 I think it goes without saying that people have their own preferences but for me at 6 feet tall I have a mullet, a 27 and a 29. The 27 was converted to a mullet and I wish the 29 came as a mullet. I’ll probably keep these bikes for the rest of my life but if for some reason I do buy another bike I will be looking for a mullet. I prefer the way they ride And it’s not because the industry told me to like it.
  • 15 2
 @PHeller: Butt rub isn’t the only issue. Plenty of clearance here, big wheels just aren’t as fun. Rampage vs world cup. Versatility vs speed.
  • 2 2
 Nah if I was to buy a brand new bike, I would go 29" no doubt. But there is plenty of life left in my current bike (Intense Recluse SL 275), so I simply converted it to a mullet.
  • 1 0
 I'd like one for my next bike but it wouldn't be a priority
  • 3 0
 @KJP1230: Great points. Shorter, racer/aggressive riders like 167cm Troy Brosnan benefit from a mixed setup for better handling and less tire contact. Taller riders like 190cm Jack Moir and 188cm Greg Minnaar are going to stick with 29er, and simply adjust frame sizing to the terrain. Size L for maneuverability, XL for more speed.
  • 24 0
 @PHeller: I'm not so sure about your numbers. On a 3 hour ride, 1% of the time would be 1 minute, 48 seconds. I don't know about you, but I'd say butt/nut buzz is pretty unpleasant for any length of time. Even a quarter of a second can leave big impression on the mind, also a big impression on other area's of the anatomy. Nearly two minutes would be... anatomically altering.
  • 3 1
 I have two mullet bikes that were originally 27.5 front/back.
  • 4 1
 @KJP1230: Bronson seems to be doing pretty well on EWS
  • 6 4
 @emptybe-er: this 29ers aren’t fun is such a silly argument. There are plenty of super rad bikes that are 29ers. Most of my rides end with a smile.
  • 2 1
 @unrooted there was a point when I was tempted to try a mullet for a little quicker handling bike from my 29er, then I switched to a 210 dropper and a higher rise bar. The combo has let me get lower and move my butt a little forward on descents and I’m no longer buzzing my butt with my rear tire while having the quick turning I was looking for. Now that longer droppers are available and I’m seeing more high rise bars, I wonder if the industry solved the need for mixed wheels without needing mixed wheels. But I’m 6’1”, so shorter riders may still feel the need.
  • 11 1
 @sunringlerider: It’s not an argument, it’s an opinion. Super rad is relative. My super rad is a bike that is versatile. It’s a fact that 29’ers aren’t as versatile for some people.
  • 6 4
 @sunringlerider: It’s also worth noting that people are now resorting to silly $400 manual trainers to use with their super rad 29’ers. Coincidence?
  • 5 0
 I mulleted my 2021 meta TR race with a Williams Racing Product mullet link to preserve geo and suspension leverage curve. The bike is way more composed now, doesn't stand up in the corners, just squats in and carves.
  • 4 4
 Annoying that when the market catches up to what people are buying then people like you say it's the "industry" forcing something on you...

You still hear about how the "industry" killed of 26" when the truth is they were sitting on the sales floor unsold.
  • 2 0
 @ryanandrewrogers: yeah dude, i'm freaking terrified when it gets steep when I usually wouldn't think anything of it on my Ransom. About to get a new wheel and see how that goes.
  • 3 0
 @zarban: No it's not. The highest ranked rider on a Santa Cruz is number 46 - Romain Paulhan. So I'm struggling to understand how the "Bronson seems to be doing pretty well."
  • 3 1
 @emptybe-er:
So because someone can’t manual it’s caused by riding a 29er? That’s amazing.
  • 2 0
 @emptybe-er: I fully understand now that little guys want to be able to look down at their front wheel and see a big boy sized wheel.
  • 3 1
 @KJP1230: Enduro racing in general the Bronson had been doing pretty well. Ard Rock, Tweed Valley and others where there's top 10's and multiple top 20's. I don't call that doing poorly?
  • 1 1
 @zarban: My comment was specific to EWS professional races, and the perspective that points totals for the year will be indicative of average performance across riders and the bikes they've chosen to pilot. When I look out over the field of top EWS professionals, I don't see anyone near the top rankings who is using a mullet setup. This is not a value judgement on mullets. Just an observation of what the pro's are picking and what platforms a lot of major brands are selecting to focus on delivering.

Does this mean that literally no one is racing mullet setups at the professional, amateur, or recreational level? Nope. Hell, I am sure you could look around at some enduro races and find some wins in various categories for 26's and pure 27.5 bikes. That has no bearing on my point: it general seems like mullets are here, and are an option - but that they are largely a niche product compared to 29ers. Again - this is NOT a judgement for or against any particular setup.
  • 1 0
 haha, I'm on full 27.5 yet, and the trend is convincing me to buy a 29 front end...
  • 1 0
 @sfrucian: couldn't recommend it enough... and I didn't do it to follow some trend, I just got sick of spending so much replacing expensive 29er rims. Equivalently strong 27.5 rims are just available for at least $100 less apiece. Helps since not even tire inserts have saved my rims out here in CO.
  • 1 0
 @ryanandrewrogers: Did you have to adjust anything for the mullet?
  • 1 0
 @PHeller: remember it’s a circle so the actual difference from ass to tire is 20mm
  • 1 0
 @sunringlerider: It sure ain’t helping, is it?
  • 1 0
 @sfrucian: depends what you mean by "have to". the bottom bracket is lower by half an inch and the HTA is at least 1.5 degrees slacker, same for the seat tube angle. honestly it rides like a bicycle and its a helluva time, nothing bad yet.
  • 1 0
 @ryanandrewrogers: rad. thats what i wanted to hear
  • 37 3
 Cool bikes, but available 'third quarter, 2022' in Canada. Why launch a bike now that won't be available to buy for a year? The bike industry is crazy right now.
  • 7 12
flag m1dg3t (Oct 4, 2021 at 9:27) (Below Threshold)
 Many industries do the same. It's to increase sales/profits. People want "what they can't have"
  • 14 0
 Unfortunate nature of supply chains in the cycling industry at the moment.
  • 5 0
 Concur, it's too far out. Unless folks are diehard Commencal fans, then likely will pick another MFG while waiting.
  • 4 0
 All sorts of companies are doing the same. And as far as going to another MFG, you are likely looking at a similar timeline.
  • 12 0
 @Tfield221: What other companies are making you pay full payment on a bike you wont see for almost a year.

Thats what made me get a different bike than Commencal last year. I'm not giving a company $6k upfront for something I wont get for 8 months.
  • 4 0
 @Kango: Bike MFG's must feel like they've landed on a jackpot of scare supply and high demand.

What other products tries to demand pmt 8 months before delivery?
  • 1 2
 @Kango: Any Direct to consumer brand. Thats the benefit of going with a bike shop brand. Youre making a tradeoff of paying 20% less for the bike, but you have to pay up front. something about cake and eating it unfortunately.

Edit: even with a shop brand, it depends on brand/shop how much up front you may have to pay up front.
  • 4 1
 @Tfield221: not sure about "any" direct to consumer. I had to pay a small deposit to Revel but won't pay the balance until it ships. Seems to make more sense than pay everything upfront and wait. I assume Revel is much smaller than Commencal, so not sure why they don't adopt this model.
  • 3 0
 @Kango: especially when companies like Tesla and Ford just want $100 to pre-order a vehicle that costs $60k plus.
  • 1 2
 @whambat: that’s just because Ford and Tesla are assuming much less risk. You are putting $100 to hold your place in line. If you don’t buy, then the next person in line will, no worries.
Bike brands just don’t have the massive operating budget and financial credit to build thousands of bikes without first obtaining capital from the buyer. At least not right now with how messed up the supply chain is.
With all of that being said, what Commencal is doing does seem a bit excessive. I’d love to hear from them on this. I’m sure they’ve got a valid reason that just isn’t apparent to us.
  • 1 0
 @COMMENCALbicycles

Are you able to shed light on this query (above) from @rallyimprezive

Thanks
  • 6 0
 They might or might not have a reason for doing this. But I have very good reasons not to give any company an interest-free loan and let my money work for them instead of for me for a full year. So many better ways to use that cash. I'd understand a small deposit. Charging the full amount so much in advance is insane and self-respecting consumers should do better than accept this kind of practice.
  • 1 0
 @rallyimprezive: What are you talking about? Bike companies cant keep stock. Their risk is much less now than ever.
  • 2 0
 @Kango: Less to sell means less profit though right? They cant guarantee supply, so cant guarantee revenue stream. And it's been an issue long enough now that im sure bike companies are a bit nervous.
I do agree that the demand is still there, which is why im not totally confident in my assumptions. Just conjecture intended to spur further conversation.
  • 1 0
 @bananowy:

It all comes to voting with your wallet:

"...self-respecting consumers should do better than accept this kind of practice."

These practices would stop and prices would drop instantly, if consumers stopped paying. I'm still waiting for a chink in the price armour ... lots of competition but no one seems willing to drop their price by 10% to best the other guy. It's too lucrative.
  • 1 0
 @njcbps: You're absolutely right, they do it because we (as in the global "we") gobble it up. MTB customers really need to demand more and better for their hard earned money.

I actually did want to buy a new bike this year but screw that. My current one is still fun enough to ride until I find something worth the price and someone who will actually sell me a product instead of taking my money and disappearing for a year.
  • 1 0
 @Kango: as a note, at least on the US website, you can’t actually buy the bike yet. You can just register to be informed of when it becomes available for preorder. Is it different for you?
  • 1 0
 @bananowy: actually go check their site though. You can’t give them your money right now - just register to be informed when preorder is available....
  • 2 0
 @rallyimprezive: Yeah, I just checked and you're right. That makes a lot more sense. I also saw some can be already pre-ordered for January. Still less than ideal (ideal being swipe card>take bike home that very moment) but I guess 3 months is kinda acceptable-ish if someone really needs a new bike.
  • 26 1
 Whoa, a mixed wheel size bike with LONGER chainstays than the full 29 model?

Isn't that usually the reverse of what happens (Transition Patrol vs Transition spire, similar bikes but different chainstay lengths), the new Santa Cruz Bronson vs the outgoing full 27.5 model, Nukeproof Mega mixed wheel vs the regular version, etc?

Wonder if this has anything to do with the relatively negative public perception that has been going around calling their bikes unbalanced in their front/rear centers?

And I wonder if they'll update the 29'er with similar chainstays here shortly?

Either way, looks like a good update/option, and horray for a still somewhat affordable bike option out there.
  • 13 6
 I sure hope so! Riding a balanced bike is an absolute game changer! Bikes definitely need longer chainstays. Makes a huge difference in how well it corners for the better
  • 6 0
 I was scrolling down to make a version of this comment. Strange to see the chainstay lengthened due to a change to smaller wheelsize. That said, they may simply be taking the opportunity to make some corrections to an imbalance in their current geo.

As a bike-shop-workin' buddy of mine explained to me fully 2 years ago: "We're gonna see a move toward a more balanced split of reach and chainstay lengths." This geo configuration would make slack front ends more manageable on climbs, and enable a centered riding position that would encourage bike tilt to steer the lower/slacker enduro bike designs.
  • 1 0
 If they would make the chainstays truly proportional to wheel base, then size XL would need a 47 mm chainstay to have the same chainstay-to-wheelbase ratio of size S, or 46 mm to have the same ratio as size M. Even more if you take into account that the rearward axle path movement is the same across all sizes, which is the case afaik.
  • 7 0
 @Aptlynamed:

IMO, its just noteworthy for the fact that they REDUCED the reach, and then gave somewhat size proportional chainstay lengths for different sizes (even if its just two). Even if the math doesn't work out as the same %% front/rear across each size.

That, and the ad copy on their official press release calls out that this was a design goal (below text copied from the release on VitalMTB).

"Once again, our choice to work with aluminum has allowed us to accompany this change in wheel size with an adjustment of the geometry. A shorter reach, a straightened steerer angle and longer chain stays allow the rider to be repositioned in the centre of the bike, which in turn will provide more tolerance and precision."

Anyway. I just think its interesting. AFAIK, this is commencals first model with different chainstay lengths. And the first time I've seen the mullet option be the longer CS, and also the first time I can recall where the reach has shrunk, and explicitly all done for the sake of balance.
  • 4 3
 Longer chain stays is a good idea, because the Meta is already poorly balanced as is.
  • 3 0
 @ocnlogan: Yup. I think we've hit max reach around 460ish for a medium 480ish for a large. Also the longer chain stays are more than likely going to make it to the full 29er range soon. These bikes have just been updated most recently.
  • 1 9
flag jaroh24 (Oct 4, 2021 at 11:53) (Below Threshold)
 What if instead of increasing chainstay lengths, they steepened the seat tube angle as the bike size increases. This way the bike has a similar feel (playful vs planted) across all sizes because of the fixed chainstay length. The way to correct the balance issue can be fixed by steepening the seat tube angle as the size increases so that the rider is positioned more and more forward while pedaling. I don't think the short chainstays affect the downhill performance as much as it does climbing and pedaling.
  • 1 1
 @ocnlogan: I'm sure they present this as a design choice. It would be strange if they said they did just because they felt like it wouldn't it?. Still the changes are so small that to me it seems more about marketing than about balance.
  • 2 1
 @jaroh24:

IMO chainstay length is more important going downhill than it is going uphill. It’s about the balance of weight on the front tire and rear tire when standing up.

I’d say that is the reason most downhill bikes have really long rear centers actually.

If seated climbing was the only goal, then yeah, you could probably do what you’re saying.
  • 1 0
 @ocnlogan: Yep I understand what you're saying here. But I thought that as modern bikes are getting longer (in reach), more of a rider's weight is forced onto the front wheel because they are having to lean forward more from the extra reach. So I assumed that a longer bike could get away with shorter chainstays. Maybe I'm thinking about it all wrong though. To be honest, I sized down on my bike because I think they are starting to get too long these days.
  • 1 0
 A fun number to find out is what is the percentage if your wheelbase (hub to hub) is front and rear center. Ive been on a hardtail that is 63% front and 37% rear center with a 64* ht angle. Its pretty amazing how much grip this bike generates even with the rigid rear end. I wish I could find a full squisher with these #s.
  • 2 0
 For what it's worth, I bought the 29/27.5" Supreme last year and reached out to Commencal for this same question, as the MX version had longer chainstays than it's 29" sibling. They said they lengthened the MX version's chainstays to help its balance, i.e. maintain stability, at high/race speeds; rider feedback during initial testing for the mullet. Completely different type of bike, but that might be a similar situation for the Meta?
  • 1 0
 @JockoJones: I'm also on a hardtail with identical numbers and I agree it rides very well with the weight distribution. I've heard from several pros on youtube that in general, when standing up on the bike, one's stance should aim to have 60% weight on the rear wheel and 40% on the front. So a bike that has 60% of its length in the front and 40% in the rear makes sense to have a properly "balanced" feel.
  • 3 1
 @stormracing: have you ridden the AM? I wouldn't call it unbalanced. That being said i ride a medium.

You can push them so bloody fast... the only thing i find is that they aren't that nimble. Adding length to the rear is not going to help that.
  • 6 0
 @MrZ32: see, I ride an XL which is where my opinion comes from. Bikes get whacky and very unbalanced at that size.
I wish chainstays were longer for the bigger sized bikes
Most bikes around medium size ride really wel
  • 3 0
 @stormracing:

This.

I'm L/XL sized (6'1" barefoot), and unbalance between the front and rear center is a big deal to me.

In small/medium sizes, its not much of an issue. But on the larger sizes it gets more pronounced.
  • 1 0
 @JockoJones:

I've actually got a giant spreadsheet of bikes with this sort of math listed. I usually think of it as a ratio, rather than a percentage.

But in size L and XL on basically any modern longish travel 29'er, thats almost impossible to find.

The closest bike (out of 26 frames x 2 sizes each I've compared), is a size L Banshee Prime, with 450mm chainstays, and 470mm reach, and a moderately slack HTA of 65.5. And that is 64% front, 36% rear. If you jump to the optional long chainstay dropouts of 460mm, then you can get to.... 36.7% rear.

Most other bikes in the category are in the 34- 35% on the rear wheel (in L and XL). Even ones with size specific chainstays (like the Norco Sight, and Privateer).

For generic info, The new Canfield Lithium has 33.7% of its wheelbase coming from the rear center, which is the lowest in my list. Although the S5 Spec enduro and updated Kona Process 153 are both close (33.9%).
  • 1 0
 @ocnlogan: I was gonna say. So far I'm finding the AM amazing, but also on a Medium. It should def be relational and change with the sizes.
  • 1 2
 Their stays were simply too short before, kudos to them for following rider preference rather than fashion.
  • 3 1
 @chakaping: Great, another thread of people talking about how we all need long chainstays. As a short-legged, long torso'd 6 ft tall guy who rides a large, I don't.

I do love some of the armchair theories about weight distribution though.
  • 2 0
 @TheRamma: 442mm chainstays are medium, not long.
  • 1 0
 @ocnlogan: I almost went with the Banshee but it was not slack enough.
  • 2 0
 @chakaping: *Kona has entered the building...

420 (pew pew pewww!) is short haha. 433 is short-ish, but pretty normal. 440 is medium range I'd agree there.
  • 1 0
 @TheRamma:

I don't think all bikes "need" long chainstays. I certainly wouldn't want 460mm stays on a dirt jumper or anything like that Razz . Mostly just saying that for the larger frame sizes in particular, they "should" help balance the weight distribution a bit more.

I think I'm probably in the camp of different chainstay lengths per size, or adjustable chainstay lengths if I had "pick a chainstay length, and be a dick about it".

That said, thats kind of why I'm surprised by the change from Commencal. Previously the Meta AM's and TR's have all been pretty firmly in the "short, for everyone" camp, kind of like the Kona Process bikes. So its a notable shift.
  • 1 1
 @ocnlogan: It's the idea of being balanced that I disagree with. A longer front puts less weight on the front end, no doubt. But, someone who is 6 ft with a 34 in inseam will put less weight out there (on the same reach) than someone who is 6ft with a 30 in inseam, due to torso length. So my center of gravity is in a different spot than another rider my height/weight. We might like different chainstay lengths, just from a center of gravity approach. Really your static center of gravity on a bike is something you rarely actually use. Steep seated climbing is one place where you absolutely have to actively compensate. The rest? Body position can handle.

I think it comes from an automotive understanding of balance, that pretends that the bike is the major contributor. As riders, our body movement/technique gives us way more control over weight distribution. Like what you like, but not everyone with a longer reach wants/needs a longer chainstay.
  • 3 0
 @TheRamma: You make a very articulate case, and I agree with you about body dimensions being a huge and under-appreciated part of the puzzle.
But funnily enough I'm 5ft 8in with short legs/long torso and also tend to ride large bikes (460mm-475mm reach).
I've tried short chainstays/long reach (former Kona Process owner) and it was great fun, but 445mm to 450mm rear centre seems to be the sweet spot for me.
  • 2 1
 @chakaping: which is perfectly fine! I'm fine with all sorts of geo. It's just the idea that there's a "right" geo that I'm against.

It's the approach that PB (particularly reviewers like Kazimer) seems more into these day, and that has people worried about things without considering the context. I don't care about STA at all, because I ride all my bikes with the stock dropper slammed to the collar, due to my hobbit legs.
  • 2 1
 @TheRamma: Your explanation about balanced geo and our body being the primary factor for weight distribution is exactly the reason why I made a comment above saying how chainstay lengths should be the same for all sizes. This way the bike has a similar feel (playful vs planted depending on design goals) for each size.

When sitting down and pedaling, there is not a lot one can do with weight distribution, hence why I think designers should alter the STA for each size to keep the rider balanced while sitting down. This way, chainstays can be kept the same for all sizes.

Another compelling argument for how body position can compensate while standing is with reach numbers. We can ride bikes with a wide array of reaches, though we tend to have our preferences. But when it comes to the distance from our seat to handlebars (ETT + stem length), riders tend to have a very fine line between ideal and nonideal. Every bike I have ever set up (whether it was old geo or modern geo) has had roughly the same distance from the seat to handlebars.
  • 1 0
 @TheRamma: So we have similar physical "challenges", but have arrived at opposite geometry preferences.
What do you think is the best solution?
1. Mid-length compromise chainstays, as on this bike
2. Adjustment chip to switch between 430mm and 450mm
3. Brands commit to long or short, and informed riders take their pick

Personally I'd vote for 2.
  • 1 0
 @chakaping: I guess 2, I just don't love adjustable geo for cranky old man reasons.
  • 1 0
 @chakaping: adjustable chainstays should be on every bike if u ask me it. It cant be any more difficult than the flip chips you see on most frames these days. And judging by the comments here it def seems like a good idea to incorporate.
I wish my bikes had em
Adjustability for da win tup
  • 15 0
 i find it hard to forgive companies even speccing a SX derailleur on anything. its absolute garbage in every way. Shimanos Deore is leagues ahead.
  • 2 0
 if you could get hold of them
  • 11 1
 2020 frame only price : 1799$cdn
2022 frame only price : 2299$/2399$ cdn
Quite the upcharge!

Hoping the finish and QC is better than my 2020 because it wasn't impressive at all. This price increase confirms that my next frame won't be a Commencal.
  • 8 2
 Yeah Commencals pricing is getting pretty ridiculous. All those wins on the DH circuit must have gone to their heads.
  • 14 1
 A good chunk of this could easily be attributable to the global shipping problem. Freight costs have gone bananas. At my place of employment we're seeing 500% increases in shipping costs even coming on the slow boat from Asia.

am.jpmorgan.com/us/en/asset-management/institutional/insights/market-insights/eye-on-the-market/dude-where-is-my-stuff
  • 6 1
 @silverstanktions: I appreciate you providing a bit of perspective, complete with source! Pretty rare these days.
  • 13 1
 I got mixed feelings about this
  • 10 2
 I LOVE the aesthetic and look of the meta. The tubesets are beautiful, minimally shaped, and flow together so well. The only exception is the linkage looks out of place and ugly. Am I the only one who thinks this?
  • 4 0
 Esthetics are important to me as well, and notice the linkage. They'd do well to look at how Norco or Transition MFG linkages.
  • 4 0
 Agreed, that link does look a little chonky.

While the frames look great, it is a bit surprising that they weight as much as they do. They aren't the heaviest tanks on the market (Banshee, Santa Cruz and RAWW take those honors for their alloy frames) but the Commencals look like they should be pretty svelte. Then again, they are rocking 160mm travel, so reliability needs to match.
  • 1 0
 @PHeller: God point, they look light. Maybe thats why they look so good. Where is all the weight?
  • 1 0
 @hamncheez: @PHeller

I'm spitballin', but suspect frame MFG's want to err on side of heavy, to minimize bad PR and warranty costs from broken frames. They can't tell if riders will be 250lb smashers, or 100lb riders with finesse.
  • 3 0
 @njcbps: I'm not questioning the WHY of the weight, but the WHERE. Where is all the weight? Are the tubes solid?
  • 1 0
 @hamncheez: The best way would be to cut into pieces and measure wall thickness.

Bike MFG's would look at warranty claims Failure Analysis and strengthen weak spots. I'd guess wall thickness?
  • 4 0
 @hamncheez: lots of metal everywhere. the top tube (with hole cut out for the shock) is quite thick (compared to the DT); all the machined bits connecting tubes are quite robust / not very optimized for light weight, etc. it all adds up. my size L meta frame is 8.0 lbs, no shock - it's chunky. also something you're not afraid to flog hard & toss into the weeds occasionally. i don't have a problem tossing around a couple extra pounds; it's a fun rig. def. not for weight weenies tho.
  • 2 0
 I always thought the Meta TR was silly. It's basically the same frame, just in a short-travel package, and it ends up weighing nearly the same. As others said, Commencal has figured out that a direct-to-consumer sales models works out great for them, but they beef up their frames to minimize warranty issues.
  • 2 0
 @xy9ine: So its actually a tad heavier than a steel framed Starling Murmur or steel framed Cotic RocketMax. I'd rather have an overbuilt frame any day, but couldn't this be lighter without ruining its durability or good looks? Maybe alter the linkage, and have the front shock mount be on the down-tube? It wouldn't surprise me if the Clash was lighter.
  • 3 0
 @PHeller: i've got the TR. and, as you say, pretty sure the metalwork is identical to the AM, just with minor geo / kinematic tweaks. in paper, it's certainly odd; 36lb 140mm "trailbike"? that said, it works (for me, anyways) - playfulness / pop of shorter travel, with the geometry & stoutness to readily dive into tech / chunk / occasional park. that said, pretty sure the chassis could be whittled a bit without sacrificing too much durability, but yeah, balancing price / claims, etc...
  • 2 0
 @njcbps: The best way would be to x-ray it, that way you still have a bike at the end of the process...
  • 1 0
 @xy9ine: but it's not impossible to build it light, i know a guy did 14.9 with pedals
  • 9 0
 only right they call the base model the sx sx
  • 1 0
 SX should be the name of a Canyon model
  • 11 4
 Why run a mullet, then extend the chainstay? Kinda defeats the purpose of having a smaller wheel if it's bolted to the back end of a boat
  • 3 1
 Further reduces genital risk; compensates for lower centrifugal force of smaller wheel and tire; stay may have been too short to begin with. Wheel still has greater strength/weight, accelerability, and debris clearance. Clash is park-biased and keeps shorter stay
  • 3 0
 This is a great looking bike and is cool and all, but I don't think the price is good enough to be honest. The top model is a very similar spec to the new Patrol, and almost the exact same geo too. The Meta SX comes to your door where the Patrol comes to your LBS. For something cutting out the middle man, I'd expect it to be $400-500 less than the bike-shop-equivalent.
  • 5 0
 At first I thought my 29 Jeffsy wasn't make for jumping and wished I got a 27.5 instead. Then I realized I just sucked at jumping.
  • 15 10
 Origin for only $2,99 and you all whine that bikes are getting expensive in 2021
  • 16 0
 I whine cuz the spec is crap... I bought a banshee prime off jenson in 2018, slx drivetrain, 34 performance... so similar build kit, $2800, to get somethin close it's now $4k. That bike does not have $1.2k better in parts.
  • 7 1
 @rclugnut: I too preferred the pre-pandemic pricing and availability. Unfortunately it''ll be awhile if ever we return to those days
  • 4 0
 In 2015 spending $1700 with Commencal got me a 160/150 27.5 bike with a yari, monarch RL, wide-range cassette, 4 piston avids, and a bombproof meta v3 frame. The spec on the origin here obviously ain't bad, but the minimum price point for enduro/trail bikes has clearly been on the move since mountain biking blew up. Commencal still got the best deals out there on solidly built bikes.
  • 10 0
 It doesn't even come with a dropper post..
  • 3 0
 @AlexBroach: Origin builds from Commencal never do. Luckily droppers are cheap. IMO tho $300 more for a dropper and ZEB on the ride model is a pretty good deal. It's just unfortunate $3k is what it takes for a baseline enduro bike these days.
  • 6 0
 I think y'all missed the joke...
  • 1 0
 @artistformlyknowasdan: Bold of you to assume bike companies are even remotely entertaining the idea of lowering prices aside from a dramatic shift in MTB popularity which I don't see occurring (unless you're talkin goin up).

The REAL thing we need to get past is the leftover SX drivetrain era. Please... Get rid of these things. SRAM needs to rework em or get rid of em and make NX the lowest. I've seen dudes on the side of the trail just tearing at those things like that old mahalo my dude video...
  • 5 0
 Look at the specs though. Would you pay $3000 for that? I wouldnt.
  • 3 0
 @theoskar57: thanks, there should be an emoji but PB apparently doesn't show them.
  • 3 2
 @theoskar57: haha big wooosh from everyone in this thread
  • 10 4
 Crazy how 2018’s $3k model was full GX. Now that’s gone up to $5200
  • 1 8
flag mi-bike (Oct 4, 2021 at 9:08) (Below Threshold)
 woosh^2
  • 2 3
 yeah, a pandemic might've had a little to do with price increases...
  • 2 0
 I remember when we were doing jokes about the shitty group sets coming to the higher price points Smile
  • 2 0
 "The head angle remains a relatively slack 63.6-degrees" - is this really only "relatively" slack @mikekazimer?
I agree that kind of figure should be a starting point for a bike like this (my trail bike is sub-63), but it's interesting to see it spelled out like that.
  • 1 0
 So, what happens next? We have gone 26 to 29/26 to 27.5 to 29 to 29/27.5 to.... Is this what counts as innovation? Nothing against Commencal bikes. I like them and the price points are fantastic. I am just wondering what the "next big thing" will be. What will be the next incremental improvement touted as a big thing?
  • 5 0
 32" front wheel please!
  • 2 0
 pretty easy on the Meta, they'll make it High Pivot and Horst Link, i actually thought they were gonna do that for 2022 model, but i guess they'll wait for the 2023.
  • 1 0
 autonomous bicycle with 3d-printed spherical tires suspended by magnetic levitation
  • 5 0
 @Narro2: its crazy how far ahead of the time they were with supreme sx...
  • 1 0
 @Narro2: They used to have a high pivot Enduro bike. It was the Supreme SX and they discontinued it in 2018. I wish they still made it.
  • 1 0
 @MTB-Ohana: thats a good point, maybe they wont bother coming back to high pivot then...
  • 4 0
 The prices are to high for me, few years ago Commençal had make much more affordable prices.
  • 2 1
 Looked at the SX Ride. At a cost of NZD$5,499 and the specs it's kinda ok, but the brakes and drivetrain would be the first upgrade. Which is another $1,000 - $1,500 just to get it at a level I'd like.

Hello Specialized Status 160.
  • 5 0
 finally Smile
  • 12 9
 Companies when they have no idea what to do for their new bikes: “make it mix wheel!”
  • 9 2
 There is a demand for mixed wheels, especially from smaller riders.
  • 3 0
 @Euskafreez: Having small and mediums mullets makes a lot of sense, somewhat for large too. But xl mullets? I'm curious if there's that much demand for that size. That'd be my size and I don't see the need for it, for myself anyhow. But I haven't ridden a mullet so can't be sure, and having more options is nice anyways.
  • 4 0
 @Euskafreez: indeed... but if a tall rider wants a full 29er, can he still have the choice with a complete bike?
Commençal completely got rid of its Meta 27.5; you can't even buy a framekit if you prefer à full 27.5 as I do.
  • 4 1
 Those are some loooong chainstays. Love my Meta TR with the playful short chainstays.
  • 4 0
 direct to consumer in about 365 days give or take a year
  • 2 1
 time to update my 2021 meta frame to an sx yes finally longer chain stays the bike will feel a lot better currently the chain stays are far to short and yes the bike feels unbalanced
  • 3 0
 higher end looks good but $3300 for guide brakes and a deluxe select is tuff
  • 1 0
 Looking at the SOH these bikes suck for anybody not vertically gifted. Zero chance at 5"8 I would not even ride even the small on north shore technical trails, SOH is far too high for nut clearance.
  • 4 1
 Will be a fun bike to shred, that's for sure.
  • 5 2
 Mullets are cool but if you’re a 29er guy, stay with the full 29er.
  • 3 0
 Shimano equipped @ around $3k would be nice.
  • 3 0
 Considering what you get for about the same from Polygon, this is getting ridiculous: Throw an Angleset on the Polygon and you've got a full XT build with Fox 36 performance fork in about the same travel package. Oh and you could even buy the XL today...heck even the lower model with a Yari and Deore is quite nice for 2599$.

www.bikesonline.com/2021-polygon-siskiu-n9-dual-suspension-mountain-bike
  • 2 0
 2021 model Essential is still at 3.5K shimano spec'd on their website. No mixed wheel though, still if you are over 180 cm, you'll be fine with the 29er, no need for mixed wheel.
  • 2 1
 Seen alot of bikes specced with a new RS Domain for 2022, wen will we get some info about that?
My guess is that it will be like a Zeb but with motion control damper unit.
  • 1 0
 Stoked on this! Wish they offered say 2 more frame sizes. Smaller gaps between sizes and they could push the small a touch smaller and the XL a touch larger.
  • 2 0
 Commencal frames did go up a lot though. 2 years ago they were 1200, now 1800
  • 2 0
 Make bike mullet with longer CS? SX builds are crap in terms of components
Fork / shock/ drivetrain / tires
  • 2 1
 Commencal should give us some bikes with the Bosch motor, its so much better. Even if these bikes were available, I dont think I would go with a shimano system
  • 5 3
 "Meta SX Origin $2,99 USD"

Cheap!
  • 1 1
 I want to order all of the stock of the meta origin please. Whoever needs o e can contact me at PB buy sell Thank you so much for the benefits!!!!!
  • 1 0
 Can t we call those Mix wheels , MX ? Lovely machine anyway, i ll take the ohlins set up.
  • 2 0
 So.... a school bus with a smaller wheel, like a drag race motorbike
  • 1 0
 So sick to see the TRP DH-R Evo's on the the team build. They are the best brake I have ever ridden!
  • 1 0
 The full 29" Meta AM option looks like it's gone? Too bad. I'm not short enough to want a mullet.
  • 1 0
 Someone know if the Meta SX replace the meta AM? Because no new bikes for the AM full suspension on their web site. Thanks!
  • 1 0
 @COMMENCALbicycles any plans to make a mullet version of the Meta TR (140/160)
  • 1 0
 Williams racing has linkage to mullet Am/tr
  • 1 0
 @Rajis: yes I've considered that option but the link plus a new wheel is very expensive and voids the warranty. Would rather have an oem version. I blew up the rocker on my 2021 supreme on my first day in the bike park so I definitely want that warranty lol.
  • 1 0
 I would have said the “relatively slack 63.6-degrees” head angle is pretty damn slack!
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer what does the flipchip do to the geo? Make it steeper or slacker?
  • 1 0
 It makes it slacker by .4-degrees - the head angle would be 63.6-degrees in the low position.
  • 2 0
 Deleted comment>
  • 2 1
 That's what I call a bargain! My fancy flatwhite was pricier this morning.
  • 2 1
 shut up and take my money
  • 1 0
 Is that a new xt derailleur?
  • 1 0
 I don't think so. I believe it is the XT M8130 derailleur for ebikes ( they look identical ) but the M8130 is supposed to be for 10 and 11 speed and the cassette in the picture is a 12 speed XT. I am kind of confused.
  • 2 1
 now only the full version is missing 27.5
  • 1 0
 When did rockshox release the new Domain? I heard nothing about it.
  • 1 0
 Available 2022, full review out tomorrow. Sorry had to.
  • 1 0
 The title is missing "Spotted"
  • 1 0
 Cool! Just found my 2023 bike! :-) :-) :-)
  • 1 0
 I cant stress how long I've been waiting for a frame like this.
  • 1 0
 kinda looks like a session.
  • 1 0
 MattP76 is losing his shit and his marbles yet again.
  • 1 0
 Well, that's my next bike for sure!
  • 3 4
 Not terribly exciting bikes but I’m sure they’re good all round packages.
  • 1 0
 Love the ohlins one
  • 2 1
 it's better than the Fox and cheaper. nice! but don't tell people the Ohlins stuff is superior.....I mean how can it be without Kashima!?!?!??!?!
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2021. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv42 0.025009
Mobile Version of Website