Commencal Meta Hip Hop - Review

Nov 23, 2014
by Matt Wragg  
REVIEW:
Commencal Meta Hip Hop
WORDS: Matt Wragg
ACTION PHOTOS: Mary Moncorge

We like the way the Commencal do things. We like the fact they make their bikes a bit heavier so they can take a beating, that they focus on fun before speed and that they are willing to push things beyond the conventional boundaries that many bike makers limit themselves with. We also like short travel bikes, especially ones designed to let you let loose on the trail. So when Commencal told us they had a 26-inch-wheel, 120mm-travel bike that was designed to be thrashed in their 2014 range, you can understand why we were excited to ride it.

While mainstream bikes have almost unanimously headed for bigger wheels, Commencal bucks that trend with the Hip Hop. Having never concerned themselves too much with what sells on the mass markets, they believe that the rider who is looking for this kind of bike will also be the rider who subscribes to the school of thought that feels 26" wheels will be more playful out on the trail. Travel-wise, it sports 120mm travel at the back and a 140mm Fox 34 fork at the front. With a low bottom bracket, long top tube and a slack, 66-degree head angle, it looks like a lot of fun on paper. The fact that it is finished off with a 780mm handlebar, a 50mm stem, sturdy tires, a chain guide, and a dropper post, make its hard-riding intentions clear. The Hip Hop is Commencal's recipe for a fun - a tough, agile bike that doesn't cost the world, with a spec designed to help you rip straight out of the box.

Commencal Hip Hop 2014
  Commencal was one of the first mountain bike brands to adopt internal cable and hose routing. A look at the Hip Hop's bottom bracket area reveals the twin-strut shock tunnel that allows the lower shock mount to pivot on the swingarm.


Construction

If you are familiar with Commencal's Meta range, you will feel instantly familiar with the Hip Hop. It lifts it chassis straight from its 160mm bigger brother, the Meta SX. Made from 6066 aluminium, "burly" is the most apt word to describe the Hip Hop's frame - with wide tubes, oversize bearings throughout the linkage, and a big tapered head tube. Commencal are so sure of the strength of the frame, that they support it with a five year warranty. A 92-millimeter-wide, press-fit-type bottom bracket sits at the heart of the frame, which includes ICSG 05 tabs to mount a chainguide. To everything looking clean and tidy, all the cables and hoses are internally routed through the main frame, and the dropper post routing is completely internal, from the head tube to the base of the post. Keeping with the burly theme, there is a 142x12mm through axle to help stiffen up the rear end.

With its striking, neon-green paint job, you're not going to fade into the background with this bike, although after finding out last year that it adds half a pound to an already substantial bike, we couldn't help wishing for a raw finish option for the bike. (it would look awesome, we reckon). The Hip Hop's MSRP is 3,300 Euros - not cheap - but a bike that comes with decent tires, a dropper post, a big bar, and a short stem, means there should be little you'll need to change to start pushing this bike as hard as you dare. That seems like decent value to us.

commencal meta hip hop


Suspension Design

Commencal Hip Hop 2014
Commencal Hip Hop 2014
  The single-pivot swingarm pivots above and forward of the bottom bracket axle - a location proven to add big-hit suspension performance and a measure of braking stability. Large pivot bearings are used throughout the suspension.


Commencal designed their current suspension layout back in 2008 with the help of the Athertons and Cedric Gracia, and modified versions of the system are used on every suspension bike they make. The shock runs through a tunnel formed by the twin-strut seat tube and is compressed between the upper rocker link and a pivot on the swingarm - a configuration said to reduce stress on the main frame tubes. At the rear, the swingarm pivot is above the rear axle. The rear axle and brake caliper are on the swingarm, so the braking forces are not separated, and the design is a simple, linkage-driven single-pivot suspension.



Riding the Meta Hip Hop


bigquotesWith a bike like the Hip Hop, the logic goes that the climbing performance shouldn't matter too much because it is so good going downhill and, true to form, it is very much is on the downs where this bike comes alive.


Climbing

Weighing a good five pounds more than most other 120mm-travel bikes, nobody should expect the Hip Hop to be a mountain goat. On the long paved and fire road stints that characterize riding in the South of France, the Hip Hop made the distances feel like hard work in comparison to its lighter brethren in the 120mm bracket. There's a lot of bike to haul uphill with you, and the Commencal doesn't feel like an especially quick-rolling bike. When faced with technical climbing, those same characteristics continued to count against it. The Hip Hop doesn't like you stamping on the pedals to force it up technical sections and in tight corners, it felt rather awkward to navigate. Switching the stock wheels out for something lighter and using a tubeless setup helped, but it didn't produce the dramatic improvement we had hoped for. In truth, we couldn't help thinking that maybe it might have been a better all-round bike with larger wheels - as they would help it roll more easily. When it came time to head out for long rides and big climbs, the Hip Hop was left in the rack, as nobody felt like taking it on.

Commencal Hip Hop 2014
  Steep, technical climbing - not the natural realm of the Hip Hop


Descending

With a bike like the Hip Hop, the logic goes that the climbing performance shouldn't matter too much because it is so good going downhill, and, true to form, it is very much is on the downs where this bike comes alive. What felt sluggish on the way up becomes a lightning missile propelling you beyond the bounds of where you'd normally take a bike with this much travel. Where the active nature of the suspension hamstrings it on the technical climbing, descending it gives the bike a wonderful sense of pop, encouraging you to hunt for hits to use to get the wheels off the ground and gain speed. It is here that the short travel starts to make sense as it gives you a directness of reaction that you inevitably lose some of with longer travel bikes - because there isn't much to compress you can load and unload the suspension easily.

While it may be short on the travel department, the tubing is shared with its bigger brother, the Meta SX, so it should be no surprise how solid and stiff it feels. Coupled with the fat tyres, big bar and short stem, this can lead you to forget that you're on a 120mm bike and go charging into burly sections of trail, only remembering what bike you're on when the rear starts to slip as there isn't enough travel to both deal with the impacts and keep you planted to the ground. No matter what we pointed the Hip Hop down it remained composed and fun, even if at times it felt like you were riding on the fine edge between disaster and success because the short travel means there is no flattery on tap from the suspension when you run out of talent.

Hands off the brakes.
  The stiff chassis makes the Hip Hop feel like it could survive whatever we could throw at it.


Where the bike is slightly let down is in the bar height. Commencal bikes tend to come with the steerer cut short and only one spacer underneath the stem. At first we tried it set with a 20mm rise bar, but this left the front end feeling far too low, which then stretched the riding position down and forwards, compromising it for both climbing and descending. Switching to a 30mm-rise bar helped - those extra 10mm of rise did just enough to make pedaling more comfortable and offer enough leverage to start to use the bike like it was intended to be. As for the playfulness of 26" wheels? Yeah, the bike was fun to chuck around, but was it noticeably more fun than any of the current crop of larger-wheeled bikes? We'd struggle to say we could find a difference. This probably won't be a popular opinion in certain corners, but with well-adjusted geometry and larger wheels, we couldn't help thinking that the Hip Hop would have been just as much fun. With the extra rolling speed, it would be a more well-rounded bike, raising it out of the niche it currently finds itself locked into. Maybe we're missing the point of this bike by thinking like this.

Component Check

Fox 34 - 140mm seems to be something of a sweet spot for the 34. Dropped like this, the fork is noticeably stiffer than it is at 160mm, and the damping seems to control the travel better. Fox have improved their damping for 2014. You can still get it to dive if you push the bike hard enough, but this seems to happen less as the travel decreases.

KS Lev seatpost - We have used plenty of KS LEV posts without an issue, but from the box, this particular post was troubled. It wouldn't reach full extension without actually grabbing the saddle and manually raising it to full height.

780mm bar and 50mm stem - We approve wholeheartedly with fitting this kind of cockpit on a short travel bike like this.

Integrated brake/shifter mounts - The Hip Hop came out of the box with integrated brake/shifter bar mounts, so you could keep your handlebar nice and tidy. However, the shape of the Formula levers meant that the brake needed to be run so far inboard that we couldn't comfortably reach the shifter blades to change gears.


Pinkbike's take:
bigquotesNormally we try to finish these reviews with a statement about what sort of rider a bike would suit, but it's hard to do that for the Hip Hop. If we were pushed, we would say that it would suit a skilled rider who is looking for a 120mm bike to thrash the hell out of and who doesn't care too much what it feels like getting to the trail head - if such a person exists. It's not a logical bike that fits any pigeonhole you care to name - and that's why we can't help but like both this bike and Commencal. They have always had the confidence to make bikes because they think they will be fun, and what personifies fun more than an impractical bike that puts a grin on your face every time you point it down a hill? - Matt Wragg

www.commencal.com


204 Comments

  • + 192
 So...you praise the company for building a fun frame without worrying about current trends, then critasize them for not using current trends saying several times that you felt the bike would be better suited with 27.5 wheels. I dont get it. Is PB just that against 26 wheels that they can no longer review a bike as it comes?
  • + 34
 Haha yeah, I thought they've lost their minds reviewing a 26". The matrix is broken.
  • + 43
 Yes the Climbing paragraph had more problems with logic. Technical calimbs and switch backs - why does he mention rolling? You don't really care for roll over when climbing a rockgarden - You care for, wait... balance, acceleration and easiness to start rolling from a dead stop - not a good place for a 29er isn't it? I honestl hate when people blame weight for climbing capabilities, particularly the weight of the frame... I just can't believe when people like MAtt who ride so much and are obviously strong, write such things, and he isn't alone. If mounting lighter wheels didn't help then it is the issue with Geometry and the suspension, but hey, blame the wheel size and sturdy take on aluminium
  • + 168
 Complains about the bike climbing poorly, posts a picture climbing with the dropper down.
  • + 8
 Could it be possible PB is getting "paid" to jump on the 650b wagon by associations upon associations of bike manufacturers? (And thus be forced to dis 26'ers?) I for one think 26's climb better on steep technical terrain. The smaller wheel just get's into pockets of traction between rocks better.
  • + 34
 fatenduro - I don't think so, that would men that companies which compete with each other on daily basis other would have to get together and form a syndicate of evil in order to do evil in shadow. I'd rather say that every MTB journalist hasn't ridden a 26" bike for at least a year as they get no other bikes to test so it's perfectly understandable. I don't think 26" bikes climb bette ron technical terrain, I'd say some 26" bikes climb better than other 26" bikes, just like 275 bike can climb better than some 29ers. Apples to oranges, wheel size is overrated, good recipies for complete bikes are overlooked.

Cheers!
  • + 3
 the review by PB sounds bias
  • + 40
 26" wheels eh? ............... Shouldn't this bike be called "old school hip hop"
  • + 5
 As much as I like Commencal bikes this one seems confused. It's just the the Meta SX but with less travel and has me wondering why you wouldn't want the extra travel on a bike with these angles. The review seems to agree, but then gives a thumbs up anyways for no apparent reason.. "we don't know who would buy this bike but we like it" ... um ok. I'm sure the bike is fun, don't get me wrong but I would never choose it over an SX or a AM .. (that bike has those new fangled wheels the review mentioned)
  • + 6
 I want to like this so much but.. Why not have a nice short 415 or 420mm chainstay if you're going 26? The chainstay length combined with the head tube cut too short would take a lot of the playfulness out of the ride, and I guess that could be why it doesn't seem to have an advantage over 27.5 in terms of character. I wonder which has more contradictions, the bike or the article?
  • - 2
 So what I am getting from this is the wheelsize is irrelevant, this bike just isn't good at stuff. That being the case they might as well keep up with the industry standard so in five years you still have tyre options.
  • + 6
 Why is it so hard to understand that one can see the potential benefits of the philosophy behind the bike, but in actuality not end up being all that beneficial. The beginning of the article just talks about how the 26 inch wheel can have certain positives, but by the end of the article those positives didn't really pan out on this particular bike. The transition bandit 26 was an incredibly playful and fun bike, but was also a good climber and could take a beating.
  • + 6
 This bike should have been lighter, slightly steeper in the ha, and spec'd for a 4x rider who rides trails. What we have here is a Meta SX with lower travel and that makes no sense.
  • - 1
 This bike has been pretty much panned elsewhere for the reasons mentioned in the article btw, I still can't wrap my head around the closing statements.
  • + 10
 Having a hard time with credibility from PB whenever they start trying to justify larger wheels with "rolling" and all these other BS descriptors. After all, these are the guys that just a couple of years ago test 3 bikes, geometry corrected (i.e. to judge purely on wheel size), and liked 26 better.
  • + 10
 I am happy that they review some 26" bikes.

It is a cool bike, but it seems like Commencal was answering a question that nobody is asking.
  • - 12
flag KJP1230 (Nov 24, 2014 at 9:52) (Below Threshold)
 You guys are all missing the point here - Pinkbike is not some grand conspiracy to "shove" 650b/29" wheels down anyone's throat. No bike company is mandating that you change to a 650 or 29er - as there are still more wheelsets/tires produced for 26" than any other platform. You are free to swap out 26" wheels to any 650b bike you like, at any time.

The fact of the matter is that 26" wheel size was COMPLETELY ARBITRARY when mountain bikes were invented. These were the wheel sizes available, so that is the wheel size that was used. No one ever stopped to question whether or not it was the "best" wheel size.

As suspension technology was maximized, geometry altered, bottom brackets lowered, hydraulic brakes refined it becomes harder and harder to eek out performance advantages from a particular bike. As a rider who is 6'2", I can tell you that after riding a modern 160mm 29er, I don't miss 26" or even 650b wheels for my all-mountain bike.

What you are all misunderstanding is that the reviewer was trying to be very polite about saying that this bike sucks compared to other bikes in nearby categories. It doesn't do anything well. It doesn't climb well because of weight and slack angles for a short travel frame. It doesn't descend well because of strange geometry and less than ideal wheel size.

In 5 years you'll all be busying hating some other new innovation in the industry while riding your 650b bikes and wondering why they hell anyone ever liked 26" wheels.
  • + 4
 You are missing the point. While I don't want reviewers to "bash" on bikes that have some merit I don't want them to "be nice" and recommend a bike that has a confused personality. As far as wheel size debate, we don't need to get into one here because the point was not wheelsize, it's the fact they cite it as an issue with this bike when in reality it's not the problem at all. There are plenty of 26 inch bikes getting the job done so the problem lies elsewhere. Your rant has nothing to do with the discussion here.
  • + 3
 What does 26" means???
  • + 1
 At either 3300 or 3900 euros, there are many bikes that will do as well or better going downhill and climb dam well also for less money. If I'm going to ride a bike that sucks at climbing, it might as well have 160mm or better. I agree with WAKI that wheel size is irrelevant here. Even if this is a good bike, why buy a good bike when there are so many great ones out there?
  • - 26
flag wydopen (Nov 24, 2014 at 11:33) (Below Threshold)
 Once you ride 27.5 going back to 26 is a downgrade... negative prop me all you like but the only reason for riding 26 in 2014 is you cant afford a new bike
  • + 6
 @wydopen - Pretty much every new trail bike bought lately that isn't 29er is a 275 - I would find it extremely unlikely (on the edge of insane) for someone who just bought a new 650B bike to go back to 26" within a year or until 26 becomes cool again (which WILL happen in smaller scale) - so don't try to sound like you are making sensible decisions. I haven't heard of anyone normal (no spoiled prick with more money than common sense) who bought a brand new bike in 26 or 29 and then sold it directly and bought another 26 or 29 bike of similar type. You are buying what you can buy and you are keeping it - it is OK

@darkstar - but it's a bike like my Blur TR, it's just heavy for modern standards. And I really love my TRc with 160mm fork, not because of weight but because of geometry. Many people love those. I remember how "enlightened" magazines like DirtMag raved about Meta 4x (twice in Dirt100) or Blur 4X and how playful they are as trail bikes, mini DH bikes. They were saying that they were riding in Alps with them, climbing thousands of feet - I have one upstairs, it's my wives, it is heavy and geometry is maybe good for 4x but total crap for anything else. Super short reach, super slack seat angles, short wheelbase, it feels like 10yr olds 29er (my wife is 158cm tall...) but there was "market" for those.

@codypup - I meant that wheelsize is overrated. Bikes should be considered as a whole, also in relation to terrain they are ridden on and under what kind of rider. There's a bloke here who has 6" Norco 275 and runs Rocket Rons on it... it says a lot about his "riding style" and how switch to 275 changed his life. The influence of wheelsize ALONE on your enjoyment and performance is... oversized
  • + 1
 Wydopen ONLY races at smooth DH courses and defined rut tracks that have TIMED descents. NO FUN, NO JUMPING (better speed scrub the lip, d00d!!) AND NO GOD DAMM 26!!! hahaha dude...you are a road biker
  • + 4
 @WAKI YES! As most modest men would agree, size is overrated, except on the internet.
  • - 1
 Waki there was a market for those because there wasn't anything better. Pre "Super-bike" there were all sorts of niche bikes that were desirable. The main issue I have with this bike (I am admittedly the type of rider who would buy such a thing, keeping that in mind) is that with it's muscular build it's the kind of bike you might use for park riding or slope. But it's kind of heavy and slack.. and the fork is not exactly what you would want for that. As a trail bike it's quite honestly terrible, citing the weight and head angle mostly. You might say well "I want less travel but I want it slack"... to that I'd say, that's great but if you really need a slack head angle like that you are riding steep terrain, and it's prob rough or you wouldn't want it that slack... so why not at least 150mm? Ill bet the bike is fun to be honest, and with some careful parts speccing it could come into it's own on the right terrain. I just wonder ... why own a niche bike like this when you can have so much more?
  • + 2
 @DARKSTAR63 - you say it now, wait until people will get stuffed with Enduro and will start to look for "options". World has it's own way of recalibrating itself to get back to balance. People like to stick out, when the time comes that nearly everyone will be Enduroing on 6" bikes with glowy non-matching kits, people will start to look for alternatives. as to this bike beeing heavy - well, it will hold up if bearings won't fail! Off course there is no reasoning behind choosing bike like that over 150mm, even 170mm bike. They all share same components, only the frame is different! I could literally take all my build from Blur TR and throw it on latest Nomad with beefier shock and upping the wheelsize off course but using same tyres and rims. But when there's too much of the same, people start to act particularly unreasonably. The only thing that speaks for less travel is increase of feedback from the terrain, and for some, and if executed properly it is a nice thing. One thing I can tell is that a bike like that should climb better than 6" bike, that's for sure.
  • + 2
 There's no such thing as the correct way to ride a bike. If some want to pop air and trick jumps to have fun - great! If some want to pin it and go racing to have fun - that's great too.

Wydopen obviously wants to go racer fast (his username is a bit of a clue there) so his choice of 275 is the smart choice. WC Dhers ride 275 because it is faster (no matter how rocky the terrain), no matter what all you conspiracy theorists think. The source of truth is in the stop watch: me and every other racer found it there.
  • - 14
flag ctxcolor (Nov 24, 2014 at 14:01) (Below Threshold)
 well then sir, you are gay. Enjoy shaving your legs and roadbiking. you are killing mountain bikes as we know it! Thanks, so hooked up





~Dan K (Crested Butte)
  • + 2
 @WAKIdesigns I've ridden all types of bikes. I spent a summer on a Cowan DS kitted with gears and a chain guide and rode xc on that. So I can understand the appeal. But a bike like this is trying to doo too much imo and as stout as it is id like it to have more travel but that's me. Commenecal does sell this bike and it's called the SX so nobody loses here. I mean you are on to something I suppose, the latest bikes are all starting to look the same but that's how it goes man. I came from a BMX backround and I look at today's bmx bikes and they are all the same. I mean literally they are the same, same angles (plus or minus a half degree), same parts, all featherlight. Total snooze fest. but hey it's what works.. they figured it out and dialed it and it's simply been boiled down to exactly what's needed. Is mtb headed that way ? Of course it won't be to that extreme because of the more scattershot disciplines but yea.. just like anything else ... look at motocross bikes. If it weren't for the decals most would have no idea who's who. No saying this is good or necessary just offering it for discussion. Cheers everyone.
  • - 1
 @ctxcolor Having ridden and raced all over the US and BC I would rank my home trails as some of roughest...650b is faster, plain and simple..

If you ride fast enough the difference in stability in rough terrain is night and day better with little to no comprise anywhere else..when I switched to 650b it didn't seem like a huge difference but getting on a 26" bike now feels just wrong
  • + 3
 ^ im assuming youre talking about tunnels! one of my all time favorite trails. that trail is ROUGH! wooo!
  • + 1
 The way I ride fast is often different from the way the ride for fun.. so mute point. Also, is the argument not sufficiently beaten to a pulp? @wydopen
  • + 0
 hiphop is dead.........
  • + 3
 moot point * lol
  • - 3
 this is only true on smoothed out TRAILS man. god dammit, you racers are killing fun. 29'er dads rule the market with their monies. god dammit!!
  • + 3
 @wydeopen - it is possible that if someone really put some hard work into 29" DH bike, then it would be faster than 275 under any bloke of average height. I am more than certain than Enduro29 kind of rig is faster than all 275 bikes when it comes to Enduro racing. When we average everything, count in everything, big wheels roll faster. When we take everything into account, people will look after the bike that performs best at races, even if they don't race. Plain and simple. If they want a DJ bike, they will look after the one under the bloke that wins fresstyle competitions.

Quite a big disconnection from common reality. We all love it, but we like to put all the arguments for reasoning of our decisions to make them sensible, logical, while all we do is we try to chose the bike that could be the fastest bike on a race. When this is what MTB is about for you, and you live up to all your words, then you better be a god damn good racer. And maybe you are I don't know. How do we measure that - Raceness? - hahahaha. Do whatever make you have fun. For instance all I myself can do now and have fun from it, is write stupid pseudo-intellectual crap on the internet.
  • + 4
 @WAKIdesigns "How do we measure that - Raceness?"

There's an app for that Wink

Bottom line is the faster you go the more fun it is so use the best tool for the job
  • + 2
 I think it's more the people than the bike that are confused, it's just made for a very specific use and you take it for what it's not. 29'ers like the process 111 of Banshee phantoms are probably better suited for general trail use if you want a short travel bike to get rowdy, but this bike would be an absolute blast on smoother flow trails. I can think of a bunch of trails that are buffed with very little rocks or roots but super fast with tons of little jumps everywhere. A trail like Half Nelson in Squamish or Tyler's Traverse in Bend must be so much fun on this thing. It's slack and stable at speeds, super nimble with the small wheels. A bike like this lets you pump the terrain and hit all those little bonus lines so much better than any 6' bike and it won't get sketchy as on a XC bike if things get rowdier. I can imagine someone living in a place like Kamloops, the Okanagan or Oregon wanting this kind of bike. Certainly not as their one bike, but part of a stable.
  • + 1
 Knob n head
  • + 1
 Mines rougher
  • + 3
 @wydeopen - "Bottom line is the faster you go the more fun it is so use the best tool for the job" - faster is a game of point of reference, do some laps on one track on your favorite bike and then suddenly change to a hardtail - that will feel like warp speed. To me strength and skill is what makes riding more fun, not the clock. Speed comes with it. I am all well aware of how relative and subjective the feeling of going fast is. Racing is another level of the game and I know very well from my professional experience in architecture how passionate and devouring competing is, especially when you are in the top tier and tasted victory, but at least for me, you can't measure the whole activity with it, whatever it is. I can't race at any higher level, I have small kids and devouring job, for me competing is going for the top or forget about it. I prefer to focus on technique on joy of riding, I learn to appreciate it to be on the bike at all, I set myself realistic goals, rather than be frustrated all the time. There is no way I can win anything. And there are more people like that. I want a bike that suits my trails and the things I focus on on them. If I move somewhere else I will have a different bike. If I buy a 29er I will focus on different things on my trails. I will ride them differently. There is this illusion created with bike reviews on the internet that all those things they test are somehow universal for everybody. People then try to know which bike, which tyre, which fork, which wheelsize is best. I don't give a bloody damn which bike wins races or ends up in Dirt100 or Top10 bikes of 2014 of some magazine - I leave it to people who race and those who are prone to marketing slogans. We are all different and there is no need to agree, there is no possibility we could all agree and decide which kind of bike is best, even though we all try to do it Big Grin
  • + 69
 Seems to me like a fun little do it all playbike. The geometry seems really dialed.

Throw down on dirt jumps, dual slolom and 4crossy stuff? Sure.
Still able to kick around on it because it's totally fine to pedal? Check
Oh, and if you want to do some steep shit it's got you covered there with a 66 degree headangle.

I think Wragg missed the point.
  • + 7
 I have to agree that these bikes always seemed to be more about DS/4X racing than trail riding... though as long as you keep that in mind, they can be a heck of a lot of fun on the trails as well.

It's competing with a Specialized SX, not a stumpjumper, as an analogy.
  • + 9
 Maybe like a Transition Double?
  • + 5
 J-t-g I missed your comment when I basically reiterated it. Vital did a review of this bike too and made the same mistake as PB. Commencal should have done a better job with marketing I guess because PB and VItal reviewers aren't clear on what this bike is all about. Not sure how anyone would look at a 120mm bruiser like this and not instantly see a play bike that just happens to be able to go on trails too. Very cool bike. I want one!
  • + 5
 I ride jumpy/sprinty/slalomy trails that I have to ride a few miles of regular trails to get to. For these rides I have always had 4x/slopestyle bikes with custom trail builds. I don't want more travel, because I want that pop. I don't want bigger wheels than 26", because I'm not that tall and the tire already hits my ass when I do a tuck air to boost over a section. If I was starting from scratch, I would totally buy this Commencal.
  • + 5
 exactly! im actually looking for a frame like this right now! between an older santa cruz blur 4x and a banshee pyre. which ever i can find first. single speed, short travel, slack angles....that is one fun bike!
  • + 1
 yep. if I didn't live near mountains and rode aggressively, I'd be after a bike like this.
  • + 1
 I ride a transition double as my trail bike, just soo much fun, 4" travel is plenty, don't get 6" travel bikes at all, if I want to go for the big stuff I get the DH rig out.
  • + 2
 reminds me of my gt distortion. such a fun little bike—does everything well and you have a blast doing it.

this is actually the most versatile style of bike possible, in my opinion, because most 120mm trail bikes simply can't handle technical downhill terrain or jumps like this thing or my distortion can because of their geometry
  • + 6
 slalom/slope bike for the trail. Sweet. throw on a 150 or 160 fork and get up to 5/8 of effective stack height. it would still have a 65 degree head angle. bottom bracket ht would still be good.
no wonder the long travel cross-country crowd doesn't get it. this bike is coming from the opposite end of the spectrum.
seems like every bike is held in contrast to an enduro race bike these days
  • + 40
 Ahhhh yes, this is a bicycle.
  • + 6
 A little impractical, a little weird, a few flaws... but gets the important stuff perfect. Just a good old-fashioned 26" shred sled!
  • + 6
 my wife has one, totally awesome bike!
  • + 6
 i love me a good bottle rocket
  • + 1
 I had one of them to, one of the best bikes i ever had, until i got the Nomad.
  • + 2
 I've still got my old bottlerocket frame... been toying with the idea of building her back up from the spare parts bin...
  • + 1
 You have to, they are still one of my favourite frames.
  • + 21
 X5 shifters, Formula brakes, 30lbs, 120mm travel, bottom-of-the-barrel Evolution suspension-complete with ZERO rebound piston(s)...take my $5-GRAND and GIMME ONE!
Oh wait. I just realized that for the same freaking price, I can get a 165mm Enduro 650b, complete with Pike forks, CC 'Inline' shock(okay, but Rock Shox now makes their Monarch Debonair to fit Spec's wonky mount), Xo1 drivetrain, and SRAM Guide brakes, not to mention Roval's new 1650-gram 30mm internal-width wheels, and actually have ENOUGH suspension to ride all-mountain-type trails. Or, a Trek Slash or Remedy 9, all three of which DON'T weigh any more than the Commencal.
I DO like the way PB tried to spin the lack of trail this bike has as being 'more fun' though.
Why can't these rags ever just come out and call a POS, a POS?
  • + 3
 you can ride all mountain trails with 120mm of travel. In my opinion theyre better than longer travel bikes. Spec is only part of the equation, this is obviously different and is used focussed on a different rider than the enduro. For example, I would probably never get a 165mm beast for AM riding here in Australia, too flat. And Ive got a DH bike so I dont need a "one bike" approach. My other most ridden bike is 120mm so its spot on.
  • + 3
 I like the frame, but can't figure out the price either. when the frame built up like a 165 that explains some of it, but the spec sucks.
  • - 1
 they should pay you to have to ride formlas, it'll only break you even after they fail on a descent on you and you end up in the hospital. but i agree, i got a Slash 7 put a dropper on it, came with deore (good enough but will eventually be replaced by XT) brakes and an okay 2X 10 set up and an awesome monarch/pike combo to keep the bike squishy.
  • + 2
 Commencal has a similar build for less on their longer travel rigs.
For 5g's you get this www.commencalusa.com/PBSCProduct.asp?ItmID=14720188
To get the build this bike uses you pay less than 3 grand considering their 3 grand rig is so much better built.
  • + 1
 i got mine for 4k... thats after tax, and after i put the dropper post in.
  • + 1
 I would go for Formulas over Avids whole day everyday. Great power and modulation and only maintanance they usually need is worn pad replacement. If they fix their levers to fit small handed people they'll be the one.
  • + 1
 @YoKev - I think you are spot on. I don't know why PB has to be so polite and try and come up with something nice to say about this bike. They get done telling you that it doesn't climb well, doesn't descend very well due to odd geometry and is not noticably more fun because it has heavy wheels (that don't roll over well AND negates the "playfulness" of smaller wheels). Come on Pinkbike - just come out and say it "This bike is expensive, heavy, comes with an entry level spec kit at a mid-range price, and doesn't pedal, climb or descend very well."
  • + 3
 Same bike currently selling online for $3199USD/EU2499. www.commencalusa.com/PBSCProduct.asp?ItmID=15091692 or www.commencal-store.com/PBSCProduct.asp?ItmID=12489283
Never trust suggested retail price Smile
  • + 25
 At last someone noticed not everybody want large wheels.
  • + 9
 but they missed the fact that for five grand we prefer to get a little better spec.
  • - 10
flag KJP1230 (Nov 24, 2014 at 10:05) (Below Threshold)
 By the way, the reason you think you don't want larger format wheels is because of the gyroscopic force of the larger diameter wheel. This gyroscopic effect is what causes you to perceive the bike as being less "playful". However, this effect is based upon two major factors - wheel diameter AND wheel weight (as well as revolution speed - but now we are getting into real physics). Because this bike is spec'd with heavy kit it is essentially negating the very reason you think you would want smaller wheels, while also offering less performance (less rollover and smaller contact patch). Additionally, the smaller wheels will have to spin slightly faster than a larger wheel at the same speed, further diminishing the playful effect.

Grab an open mind and a modern 650b or 29er with good wheels - you'll be surprised at how playful these bikes are. I would venture to guess that if you could hypothetically ride one "blindfolded" you would actually prefer the bigger wheels.
  • + 3
 I would still prefer 26-er with good wheels. Just sayin'
  • - 8
flag KJP1230 (Nov 24, 2014 at 10:45) (Below Threshold)
 That is fine. Everyone is entitled to their experience. I am just saying that based on objective physics - you just might think that a 26-er is providing you certain benefits, when in reality this is more a matter of your perception and not the characteristic of the wheels or bike. By that same token - not every wheelsize is ideal for every circumstance. It would be dumb to argue that a 26' wheel belongs on a BMX track. When it comes to mountain biking though, larger wheels roll faster, provide more contact surface, provider a lower angle of rollover, carry more speed, and provide less gyroscopic force than 26" wheels of 5 years ago.

Keep an open mind. The future is bright when it comes to innovation.
  • - 3
 26 is more snappy..27.b is only good for winning the race on a built track. DONE
  • + 2
 @ctxcolor 26 is not much more snappy than 650b. All MTB wheel sizes are "snappy" when you come from MX.
  • + 2
 @ctxcolor- Remind me to kick you in the nuts, then smoke you on your local trails at the EWS this year on my 650b bike.
  • + 1
 word bro? you enjoy those non-timed up hill rides, or as I saw most of the 'pro's pushing their rigs to the top. GLORIFIED DOWNHILL RACE. come catch me at the top of mt. Baldy, bruh. You ever hit Purple mountain before? what about lower down in the purple palace..didn't think so
  • - 2
 Haha! I'll see ya in Crested Butte "bro".
  • + 19
 You're a bit late to the table with this review are you not, the HipHop is now a discontinued model, you can still get it in the outlet though
  • + 18
 am i the only one who stopped buying bike magazines due to the lack of 26' bike reviews?
  • + 4
 Not alone, in fact Im starting to hate mtn bikes. I love my 26, used to ride 20" freestyle and bmx bikes, at least they still make those. Smile
  • + 0
 Trek session park..if we keep buying these, then trek will get real and start selling it as a frame only
  • + 3
 Nobody has a sense of humor.
  • + 14
 Show us how versatile this bike is instead of critiquing it as a trail bike. Of course there's better choices for trail riding, it's not a 150mm plastic super bike or 120mm ultra light xc bike. Hit the trails, some DJ, pump track, 4x and maybe even some street. This is a niche bike for a rider that want's to play on everything. Not sure why it's only being tested as a trail bike? Thank you Commencal for offering a niche bike for riders who get it.
  • + 4
 Agreed, the platform from the getgo seems like a versatile park bike, and not something you want to spend any amount of hours climbing on. I ride an old santa cruz vp-free, that was dubbed a do everything long before this enduro craze. and it is tough just pedaling it around the park. it is a park bike. nothing wrong with making and calling a park bike a park bike
  • - 3
 You'd think a park bike would come with a more robust fork and better brakes. Especially for the money.
  • + 6
 "...Thank you Commencal for offering a niche bike for riders who get it" wow--YES. This is NOT a trail bike--its a dick around bike. This reviewer road bikes too much on his 150mm 29'er through the mountains.
  • + 4
 "dick around bike" love it! It is totally a dick around bike. "Dick around" should be a category. Sadly there would be few bikes in the DA category these days because KOM is taking over FUN.
  • + 14
 "There's a lot of bike to haul uphill with you." So 29.1 lbs is heavy now? It even has a granny ring. Get out of the computer desk and into a squat rack.
  • + 15
 Photos date back to February... why wait so long for the review?
  • + 0
 26 is dead, and pinkbike is making sure no one reads this review. BRING BACK FUN, SPIN 26
  • + 8
 So why is it that mountain bike journalists who are likely pushing these bikes much harder than I can are not limited by the Fox Evo suspension but I feel like it dives, chokes and wallows?
  • + 7
 Agreed, everything CTD sucks.
  • + 24
 CTD = Cant Tune Dat
  • + 6
 Been riding my hiphop for six months now. From local trails to the maxi in Vallnord Andorra. From frustration to a wide grin ... always a thin line with the hiphop. Nevertheless totally hooked with my green hooligan, and I believe it makes me rider better ...
  • + 6
 Love these types of bikes! I've got a 26" GT distortion that can ride any trail, climb well and fun to take to the 4X or DJ's. I'm surprised there aren't more of them, especially when not everyone goes to a downhill park every weekend.
  • + 3
 nah dude..26 is an old industry standard. People hate fun now--its all about 'road bike' style of winning on wheels these days. FUN IS DEAD.
  • + 6
 I love bigger wheels. 9ers spawned so much drama (I have had three, still own one. I love them just for the argument) and 27.b created a boon in affordable awesome second hand 26ers that every doctor and lawyer had to shed just to remain the same as their strava buddies. I am really hoping for another "technological" break through to keep this awesome used market going. Reminds me of NZs first 27.b specific trail, man I hate it when my wheel size doesn't match up with the trial I am ridding. I am hoping for a wheel size between 27.b and wagon 9er to get the next frenzy going. Lets go 28.33, 28.25 is in the middle but that .33 as in 33 and a 3rd may get moar baby boomers in on the frenzy. #28.33FTW
  • + 5
 Seems like a fun bike for the rite terrain. Plus it's a got 26's what's not to like. Mine slope some dj's or get rowdy on some loose trails. PB bitch to much unless it's the next carbon 650B wonder bike. Jeesh chill people. And who cares what it's called. Nice one Commencal!
  • + 4
 I'm all in for nice 26ers, I grew up on them, I love them, they always made sense. But this bike seems to take a step backwards. I had a Rocky Mountain Switch SL back in the days with 150mm travel and it was nice and slow to pedal up. Down was another matter as this thing just wanted to have fun. It was what we called a Freeride bike back then. What I dont understand is this bike though as it seems it cant do anything better than others. Upwards its akword and downwards its limited by its travel. So what its for then? You dont want to put it into a category which is awesome as I hate that thinking but we do need to know for what kind of rider this bike was designed for. For one like me that wants a bike like my 12 year old RM Switch? Time has moved on even for me and there are a lot of bikes out there that are way more suited to replace my old Switch and that are still fun to climb with. A 120mm travel bike thats not fun to climb with is only suited for slopestyle, 4X or whatever...
  • + 1
 i agree with this, look at the spesh enduro SX/the pivot 4x etc/DMR bolt great bikes for this kind of riding that weight considerably less, or a transition scout/whyte t130 that are better alrounders that will descend very nearly as well (if not better in some circumstances). I'm looking for a bike with this sort of philosophy and the hip hop just didn't rate as well as the competition.
  • + 1
 I'd like to see a review of Meta SX. Still 26 and with 160 travel this will be an all terrain killer.
  • - 5
flag ctxcolor (Nov 24, 2014 at 12:08) (Below Threshold)
 honzo has never gotten 'loose' or 'sideways' on purpose...sounds like the type of dude that see a S-works enduro and clamors to his buddy, "..now ya see that Greg, now that's a down-hill mountain bike rite there that is"

hahaha
  • + 6
 Am i the only one that just looks at the pictures 1. because i cant be bothered reading and 2. because im debt from buying another bike so i know i will never buy this one.
  • + 1
 And because anything that the PB folks write is just mindless drivel.
  • + 8
 I like the way that damper is exposed to mud.
  • + 4
 clearly something that can be fixed with a piece of inner tube and some zip ties...
  • + 1
 I think Commencal has a mud guard that comes seperately
  • + 3
 they have an integated one that comes with them usually i think.
  • - 3
 I like the way you open your mouth and let any old crap rumble out, I've had a Commencal Meta V3 for the last year and mud has never been an issue with the rear shock, Commencal supply a mudguard for the shock!
  • + 6
 @Medacus too bad it can't be seen on the photo and author forgot to mention about it. I'm sure that Commencal Meta must be thrilled to see that theirs hardocore fans are always alert to defend their product by insulting other people.
  • - 11
flag Medacus (Nov 24, 2014 at 2:38) (Below Threshold)
 If you don't want "insults" then don't post factually incorrect statements on the Internet without doing some research first.
  • + 8
 Instead of jumping to people throats talk to Matt about missing info in his article.
  • - 8
flag Medacus (Nov 24, 2014 at 3:07) (Below Threshold)
 That's not my problem, you were clearly trying to be smart with the wording of your factually incorrect post.
  • + 12
 My post was referring to the picture in this article and as far as I'm concerned there's no mud guard on it.
  • - 1
 Location of the shock makes it not suitable for riding around here. The shock would be ruined almost immediately with mud and rocks embedded in mud. A mud guard, if one exists, could help but that would cut down on clearance. Better to just get a frame that doesn't expose the shock to mud build-up.
  • + 1
 @dfiler If you think you have bad mud and rocks where you are then you should see it here in Scotland or Andorra where Commencal is based.... I'll say it again, the shock does not in any way get destroyed by mud or rocks, the mud guard does not cut down on any clearance, I've been out on rides where the only clean part of the bike is the shock stanchion, this is because the supplied mudguard does it's job well
  • + 1
 Rain in Scotland? Never ...
  • - 1
 Oh, so there's a mud guard. That's something the review should at least mention. The bike is worthless to many people without one. Seeing photos is also critical. The mud around here is clay based and can pack so tightly that it locks up the wheel.
  • + 1
 dfiler did you get spare shock with your frame? I never got extra one, so protecting shock, for me at least, is something worth mentioning.
  • - 1
 Or you could listen to the people who actually own one when they say the bike comes with a mudguard and that its not an issue!, yes the reviewer was wrong not to mention it but tbh, it's a discontinued bike so why it's actually getting reviewed is beyond me
  • + 1
 Who wrote, before my comment, anything about rear shock protection?
  • + 1
 lol. Medacus, why so pissed off? I never saw that a mud guard was offered and it wasn't mentioned in the article. No need to downvote comments simply because they mention a mud guard being absolutely necessary with a shock mounted where this one is.

Chill out and realize that some people here are honestly discussing the topic of a mud guard.
  • + 0
 Well the Meta V3 platform has been in existence since 2012, there are numerous reviews on the internet that do mention the shock protection and heavens forbid, should you actually do some proper research into it and look on Commencals website you would see that under accessories it has a shock protector listed.
Reviews are not gospal! They cant be correct 100%of the time, if they were people like you would have nothing to moan about!
Anyway, i'm done here, it's clearly not the bike for you.
  • + 2
 "Reviews are not gospal! They cant be correct 100%of the time, if they were people like you would have nothing to moan about!"

When I'm reading review, in one of the biggest MTB sites on the Internet, I would like to get all the necessary information which INCLUDES details about factory rear shock protection. Considering that you're a Scot you should be familiar with muddy rides and knew how mud can shorten life of damper seals. Central Europe is not California, sadly, so it's genuine important to think about life span of expensive rear shock.

If Commencal sells mudguard with bike it's great but instead declaring Jihad to the rest of the world you should write one sentence clarifying this issue.
  • + 4
 26" wheels on a mountain bike?! Cutting edge... Still haven't tried a big wheeler yet and still don't feel like I'm having less Fun than anyone else
  • + 6
 Great..........another new wheel size
  • + 2
 I have this Bike as i liked the way my previous 120mm 26" wheeled bike descended. This is Much better. As the review said its no where near the best going uphill but going downhill you feel like your on somthing with more travel. This handles like a dream and really will give you the confidence a 150mm travel bike has. I have 2 commencal bike (META & SUPREME) as there way of building bikes matches my style of riding. Forget having the lightest bike or been the king of climbing its all about having fun for me
  • + 2
 The general statements of Commencal building fun bikes and bikes that will take a beating ring true with me. I have a 2008 Meta with 26" wheels which is great to ride. I have also banged it up a bit in various crashes over the years but it still performs great. The suspension on mine is 140mm which once you use would put you off going back down to 120mm personally. Can't help but feel the Meta frames should have more travel to be fully enjoyed so maybe the review could of pointed out the merits of going for a SX a bit.

Over the years I have really been impressed with the quality considering the price of my Commencal.
  • + 1
 I picked up one of the last Santa Cruz TRa recently. The Blur TR is a tad steeper and I think that helps it uphill. The TR is now the SOLO, which is selling well. The RM Thunderbolt and Kona Process 134 both seem to get rave reviews as well. The Commencal pushes the slack/burly equation too far into a DH only niche and who wants a 5" downhill bike? GT tried this a couple years back with the Distortion and they eventually killed it after a season or two.
  • + 1
 Id still choose my sub €1000 el camino over this thing,I can upgrade it as I like,it's taken me up and down mountains and the only thing that's broke is me!! frame is solid with huge welds,fork works etc etc I couldn't justify spending that much when I can have so much fun everywhere on my 27.5 hardtail,also I'm 6ft 3 so the wheels don't feel much bigger but they do roll over better. 26 look small to me!!
  • + 1
 I really like commencal not only because they have a wide selection of bikes that fit pretty much any kind of riding style but also because they have some extremely cheap entry-level builds available (under 2k)! If only more bike shops retailed them!
  • + 1
 I would love to try this bike. I have been thinking a lot lately about what I would ideally like to be one and i think and shorter travel, slack, burly enough bike to rally the crap out of is what I would like. I love me a 160mm bike but riding a hard tail lately makes me thinking maybe a little less travel would be fun to..
  • + 1
 I had a meta for a year and sure the bike is retardely fun on the downs. But is not even close to compensating how annoying it is to push up. that horrible feel when you reach that short xc type fire road that every trail has (you know the one) is ten times worst than any fun you will ever get, so pinkbike i have a niche for this bike riders who own a helicopter, Those guys would get a blast out of it.
  • + 1
 "...As for the playfulness of 26" wheels? Yeah, the bike was fun to chuck around, but was it noticeably more fun than any of the current crop of larger-wheeled bikes? We'd struggle to say we could find a difference." SHAME ON YOU!! You even ride dirt jumps bro? You ever freeride off a summit, do you even pumptrack, d00d? You can't spin 26, that's all this review exposed. Gome..you are a gome

Peace


~Dan K.
  • + 1
 plain and simple.....he looks a little too #enduro for a go out and "thrash it bike." ah hahaha, needed skinny jeans and some sleeveless steez action. haha, that would sell it
  • + 1
 Looks like a great bike. I'm down with 26'' and short travel. It also looks very clean like all commencals do. You did good Commencal. Now someone needs to give me the cash to buy this
  • + 2
 Chainstays aren't particularly playful at 430mm, seems like they could have eeeked out a little more nimbleness for the smaller wheels and compact suspension design.
  • + 0
 --but they wanted it to be some gomer-specific 'trail ripper' that still pops 26. Bike looks sick..just needs a more burly air shock on the rear, mud guard and proper fork--EVERYONE WOULD LOVE THIS BIKE. I REALLY dislike how the review is based around the stock build. NO ONE, I repeat, NO ONE who rips bikes sticks with stock jank. Always fit to your body size and riding style...forget this review ever happened. This dude can't ride 26
  • + 3
 Too bad its discontinued, sweet rig, commencal has a rad 2015 range now as well.
  • + 2
 Since when does a bike that costs 4000 Euros "[not] cost the world"? That's far from affordable in my book...

It looks nice though.
  • + 3
 for that 4000 eur i'd rather have the top of the line capra not an aluminium bike with low end components
  • + 3
 lovely bike! i'd love to own that
  • + 3
 looks like a nice bike Smile
  • + 2
 It's a bicycle. I remember looking at new mountain bikes, and wheel size didn't come into is. Shame it does now.
  • + 0
 Bikes like the transition scout, Whyte t130 and rocky mountain thunderbolt have the same philosophy, but actually pedal and weigh like a 120mm bike should. Not to mention having the same chainstay length with 650b wheels!
  • + 7
 The hip hop is somewhere between an enduro bike and a slopestyle bike, not somewhere between an enduro bike and an XC bike. Notably different goals
  • + 1
 Banshee legend 2015 --> still 26"
seen here "http://www.bikerumor.com/2014/11/24/banshees-2015-dh-race-bike-is-longer-leaner-and-more-legendary-than-ever/#more-91003"
  • + 3
 5 year warranty? f*ck yeah
  • - 2
 And it'll be usefull!
  • + 1
 I'd like to know about some frame that has cracked after five years of use, and that the reason of this crack has been due to a manufacturing defect. Any five-year or over-one-year guarantee is pure hype, that's to say, a ripoff. If one frame has to fail because it's poorly made, it'll usually do it within the first year of use. Someone who rides once/twice a week for instance only needs one year guarantee.
  • + 3
 Maybe the last 26" wheeled bike review we will ever see on pinkbike.
  • + 1
 because this idiot doesn't know how to even rip 26, yeah, then we will never see a 26" review on pinkbike EVER AGAIN. Where have all the rippers gone? Lost to racing and 'road biking' through the mountains. I'M TAKING FUN BACK!!--GET READY EVERYONE, FUN IS COMING
  • + 0
 Good!!
  • + 1
 sorry i don't know what happened
  • + 3
 Just like public enemy sang..... DON'T BELIEVE THE HYPE!
  • + 2
 Seems to me that GT came up with this exact concept years ago when they brought out the distortion...
  • + 2
 this isn't a bike i'd ever consider buying. having said that, i'm glad commencal made it anyway. cheers commencal!
  • + 2
 As Top Gear would say "Ambitious but Rubbish"
  • + 3
 gangsta rap!
  • - 2
 recommended use trail, allmountain, BIKE PARK? Big Grin really? with 120mm in the rear, are you kidding me? Maybe the Meta SX with 160mm, but the Meta frames cant accept a piggyback air shock.. so I wont use any of them for an allround bike...
  • + 1
 Hahaha, someone else who clearly knows nothing about Commencal. The older ones couldn't accept a Piggy back, the newer ones can! A modded chain stay can be purchased for those that can't.
  • + 1
 Its okay that '15 models can.. but its a shame from the company that '13 and '14 models cant...
  • + 3
 The 2014 anodised ones are capable of taking a piggyback shock
  • + 7
 You can ride a hardtail in a bike park, still have fun, and go faster than at least 50% of the dentists on v-10's. 120mm is easily enough. Saying that 200 is a bit more "sensible", but who cares about sensible?
  • + 0
 120 is not enougn believe mi, maybe 150 or 160mm below these you always care about blowing your shock, heating it up or break something.....
  • + 2
 I have to disagree with @riejuspike. @gabriel-mission9 knows what he is talking about. I currently have a 2013 trek fuel ex that I took to the bike park at least once a month. Sure I want more travel for my shenanigans but nothing broke.
  • + 2
 Why wouldn't it be good in a bike park? Seems like that's what it's aimed around. Slopestyle bikes (e.g. NS Soda Slope, Dartmoor Shine, etc) are at home in bike parks and they only have 4 inches of travel....
  • + 1
 good to hear it @Rdot84 Smile I tried 2014 26 inch fuel ex it was a nice bike too!
But I am a bit of a mixture guy, so 160 would be my best.. Hopefully I can sell my dh rig, I am planning to switch to a 160 allround enduro freeride dh bike...
  • + 1
 i got the meta am 650B for like 2 grand... no words, probable the best enduro bike i have ever seen
  • + 1
 Riding a Morpheus Loki in 26" with similar geo and 150/120mm travel. Just fun to ride! True freeriding, no racing.
  • + 1
 Run 2.7 Kendas like I do on your 26er and your wheels have a larger diameter than 27.5s with standard 2.35 tires.
  • + 8
 Haha kenda
  • + 0
 And the '650b Award 2014' of "I won't sell any of this model bike because it has the now out of date 26" wheels" goes to Commencal!!! Congratulations....well done!! ;-)
  • + 1
 looks like a nice bike! i am also glad to see some 26" wheels but 4,000 euros seems a little steep....
  • + 2
 I'd take a Santa Cruz 5010 over this any day.
  • + 2
 get the TR 26" version. the leverage ratio is all messed up, but who cares..it's SICK!. for real though..26 over 650 for fun..always
  • + 2
 Are you kidding me? Riding a bike is fun regardless of wheel size.
  • + 3
 Review the new Meta AM
  • + 2
 There is one on the new issue on Enduro mtb as well
  • + 1
 See some interest, so then here is instagram with live photo range commencal 2015 instagram.com/rouxcycles
  • + 1
 The PERFECT place for shock's shaft to collect ALL the mud what rear wheel throw out... Commencial: I'm wearing It!
  • + 1
 Agreed. the stanchion is just sitting right there waiting to get damaged. Commencial should have put some sort of fender in there, or a peice of old tube zip tied in place to offer protection.
  • + 2
 Why buy this when you can buy an Evil Uprising?
  • + 3
 26 ain't dead !!!
  • + 1
 Looks really nice & long live 26", but 4000 Euros for a bike with X5 components!? That puts me off straight away!
  • + 1
 I still don't get how they make these bikes stand up unaided!!!!! How?!! How?!!!!!!!!!!
  • + 1
 One matey does a ghostie.. the other takes a photo.
  • - 3
 "We like the fact they make their bikes a bit heavier so they can take a beating", I for one call bulls**t. The 4 meta 5.5 frames I cracked, the 3 supremes my mate snapped and the countless other cracked metas you see and hear about say otherwise
  • + 7
 From memory they had issues up until 2010 when they changed factories but the last few years there frames have been made in a different factory and as a result have been much better which is why they are now backed up with a 5 year warranty
  • + 2
 Expensive.
  • + 0
 Weighs 1 lb less than my Knolly Chilcotin. 40mm less travel. Sounds like it climbs and descends worse. Why would I buy that?
  • + 1
 and doesn't that paint job look oddly familiar?
  • + 0
 Nice bike, hope the make it in a 27.b wheel size soon.
  • + 1
 nope, we need fun, not road bike racing
  • + 1
 Which leads me to think, would road bike racing be more fun if it was actually on 650b's? Smile
  • - 1
 A bike I'd never consider due to the name.
  • + 2
 Funny, considering Your name ; )

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2019. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.091510
Mobile Version of Website