Riding There were a number of things about the Supreme that were welcome surprises from the start. It was my first ride on a downhill bike for a while, and first time ever on a 29" model. Despite the sheer size of the bike (it barely fits in my van or garage, and it likes to fall off shuttle trailers and chairlifts), it takes off swiftly on the pedals, and from the first run, I felt like I could do nothing wrong.
Well, almost. I instantly found myself over the working speed limit of my mind and eyes on my everyday trails (normally hitting the bikes limit comes first). I was riding faster than ever, but well below the bike's limit. Strava isn't the most accurate way to time runs, but four PR's out of four on my regular trails, starting from the very first run? That was impressive.
From the outset, the Commencal was as close to silent as possible, with no need to add tape here and rubber there to keep things quiet. It was also so smooth on the initial strike of each bump that it eliminated small trail feedback, and even when landing small jumps and hops I could barely, if at all, feel the rear wheel coming back in to contact with the ground.
After the first couple of rides, I had to wait patiently for some more big wheel DH bikes to turn up before I could to make some back-to back comparisons. Was the Supreme
that good or was it just big wheels combined with a DH-sled that surprised me?
More testing ensued, and things only got better. Charging into rough rock gardens and braking bumps is unreal - I tried a section in Pila faster and faster, and the Supreme was the first bike I have ever ridden that got easier to handle the harder I pushed it. It never even came close to flinching. As mentioned in other reviews, for me, the high pivot system is the holy grail for a flat pedal rider who wants his feet planted on the pedals at the worst of times. The increasing chainstay length gives more confidence as it extends through the travel. The stiff but not harsh front end, combined with a fairly flexible swingarm, allows enough give at the rear wheel for fantastic tracking and line-holding through rough and off camber sections, without springiness found with some carbon bikes.
Rider-forward handling: What else to say about the Supreme? Despite its massive 495mm reach number, it didn't feel as big some similarly sized bikes I've tested. I put this down to the long chainstay and rearward axle path, which helps my center of gravity move forward between the axles as the suspension compresses, and keeps me more centralized on the bike. The front end rarely felt like it was getting away from me, and I never needed to lean back over the saddle when things got steep and gnarly.
That forward stance may be a sticking point for riders who are used to parking off the back of the saddle when things get gnarly, as the Supreme will feel horribly out of control. A change of technique is required to stay forward, and more upper body and arm strength will be required to stay in the middle of the bike and keep charging on.
Cornering: Anything without a berm for support, with camber and rough is a traction treat, the small bump sensitivity is fantastic and the flex in the rear wheel and triangle seem to glue the bike to the dirt, while still having plenty of support to push against. The bike feels big in the berms, but the not-so-low bottom bracket height makes it easy to flick between opposing corners.
Braking: Under braking, due to the high-pivot location, the bike squats into the travel, but I am a fan of this. This bike
should be ridden down steep and gnarly downhill tracks, and you should not be braking on flat ground over bumps. You are, however, going to be hard on the brakes on steep sections into corners. The suspension will become slightly less sensitive, but I believe you will always have more grip on the rear wheel, a feeling I prefer compared to having a bike that pitches forwards and un-weights the rear wheel, despite their suspension being more active under braking.
Rode one of these at a demo. Didn’t have a ton of runs to get really comfortable, but I can confirm that it is indeed really, really fast. You really need to be a really good rider to get the most out of it. If not ridden at ten tenths it feels like driving a 60 foot stretch limo thru city traffic. This is not a park bike. If your day at the park includes stopping at every trial junction to bro down before this is not the bike to you.
It’s a weird time for DH bikes. The bike industry has convinced us all that 29 is better. And it is faster as proven by the World Cup. But most people can’t ride them to their potential like Paul Aston can. In fact, most people are not going to enjoy riding a 29 DH bike. The bike industry knows this. This is why Santa Cruz is milking as much money as they can out of the current v10 molds before coming out with the v29. The serious racers will buy them but how many regular park bros are going to buy one when they become a more known commodity? Add in that you have a lot of people that go to bike parks 2-4 times per year (the majority of bike park visitors) are buying Nomad/Capra/Torque and bikes like that are more versatile than a full on DH bikes and you have sales going down. Less sales mean that the cost has to go up to cover development costs. How many people have bought the Session 29? How many people are going to buy an 11,500$ v10?
500 two stroke analogy?
I rode an R6 for 10 years (until it finally let go). Around town it was difficult to ride. However, at full tilt - 10-15k RPM and hammering the corners, it was fantastic. Definatley better the faster. I now ride a Triumph Thruxton R. Not nearly the superbike, but a lot easier to ride every day.
500cc two stroke. Yeah, incredible, but who can really ride them to their potential?
I ended up buying the Pole Evolink 140 29" and everyone who rides it exclaims how they couldn't imagine it would be so maneuverable, so fun!
When Prince tennis racquets arrived they got crap from everyone... everyone who hadn't played them. 1-2 years later every pro & am were playing with an oversize racket! That's what's coming to mountain biking as soon as the major brands can find a way to sell their current "out-dated" tech they will be singing the tune of long chainstays, longer reach, long wheelbase and saying it was their idea. Remember Specialized saying they would "never" do 27.5... yeah, right!
And now all the early adopters/internet taught experts with money are jumping on the extreme geo train.
There is a lot of confirmation bias with these new age geos. Most people that drop 6k on a strange bike nobody else has bike aren't going to say it isn't way better than their last one. And nobody wants to admit they don't have the skill to ride the bike to it's full potential. Dr. Toothpuller has never had has Porsche above 81 MPH and sure as heck never pushed his Nicolai to it's limit. (just like he never hit a 300 yard drive with his Taylor Made's back in '04)
real rippers gon' rip.
Commencal has both the Furious and the Clash for thee non-racy park rat horde, showered or not.
I'm all for versatility, but that's for the trail/enduro and freeride/park segments - for the party everywhere people, not for the beat-the-clock-on-raceday people.
Race bikes are race bikes due to them being super-specific and probably shouldn't try to do everything.
The reason I ask is that I just purchased a Supreme 29er and I can confirm that even on my first lap it was more fun and better for me than my old V10, no matter what speed I was riding. However, I'm fairly tall (6'4"), and I can imagine how it might feel like too much bike for someone smaller.
I'm not trying to poke holes in your comment, I'm honestly curious because I have a couple shorter friends interested in the bike after hearing my praises and I would hate to see them waste their money.
I've been racing the Supreme V4.2 for all these season so I suposed the bike should not be very different. First day the suspension was not set up for me. 1 full day making some changes and then the second day of riding.
I ride every week for at least 3 days and train for 4 or 6 days per week and I ended totally exahusted. It felt faster and you have to work harder to ride it properly and not crash.
In the berms you have to push harder, you have to bend the bike more and have a good technique level to understand how you have to ride it.
In the technical parts you have to work a little bit more also and I didn't felt comfortable when breaking (it's different from 27.5).
When it comes to jumping it was very stable but different timing and very easy to overjump everything.
People in Commençal agreed with me when I said that it is harder to ride and definetely more racing oriented. In the best case you have the same fun than in 27.5 but most people won't.
Some friends here told me that I just needed more time with the bike to get used to it but I don't know. In less steep trails I really think you need to work even harder to keep this bike moving.
I hope the Norco was different and more friendly but after reading this, maybe we have to wait 1 or 2 years to see how these bikes work for the average rider
I’ll buy one, you will buy one and how many more people? If the next V10 costs 7 grand with a garbage build how many people will just buy the Commencals and how long will SC make it. Does Specialzied make another Demo or do they decide to come out with an electric Demo?
Same comments here as back then, when 29ers hit the big market.
Yeah they are faster unless you ride very tight stuff.
(enduro-mtb.com/en/nukeproof-mega-290-factory-review)
That said I think it's fair to say that assuming fit/suspension/geo work for a rider, all else being equal a 29er will be faster on a majority of tracks. Yes this is parallel universe stuff as @WAKIdesigns says, there are always too many variables in the real world.
@dontcoast I agree with your points. When that day comes it will change things. As it stands today its all over the place. I just enjoy the comical marketing.
Actually, No. No it's not. I have a set of Saints that are several years old. Multiple Whistler trips (expert level riding) and countless park laps around Colorado. Zero issues. I even have a set of Carbon SixC's 2+ years old without issue. Those e13 cranks sound like garbage, at least for that bikes intended purpose.
Last set of cranks I bent, even in a crash, was more than 10 years ago. Since then I've mostly run Shimano and even when snagging them on stuff super hard, or casing jumps hard enough to snap rims, they've been fine.
Not even sure they exist anymore..
Would love to trow a foot over it as Ive never ridden a 29er before.
Commencal is doing a lot of things right - hats off!
Not much to compare against here, and feels like a lack of experience may be contributing to the "WOW" factor.
I did say in the article it was the first one I rode, and had to wait for the others t arrive to make a comparison, I had this Supreme since December last year.
Thanks, Paul.
Ha, that's kind of rad! Hard to argue with that.
I do own the Meta, and it is an amazing bike, and definitely feels like a bike with way more than 130 on the back.
@pakleni: They should pedal fine with an idler
#saynotoplastic
Gee Atherton's best years were on a Commencal which was well known as the heaviest bike in the race paddock.
Chasing light weight DH bikes is utterly ridiculous
Did they not get the memo?
You're supposed to make your bike as incompatible as possible!
I thought downhill bikes were dead??
It happened to me with loading system you mentioned. I think that if mounts are moved a bit higher there should not be a problem any more. Anyway that happened on one of two mounts that were on the chair. So I just needed to be careful when choosing my chair lift line
Bike trailers have similar problems.
Trust me, it starts to get really fu**ing annoying, especially when the lift attendant is shouting at me to let go of the bike and let it hang freely - when I KNOW it will fall off (again) if I let go
You sir. Have made me laugh multiple times today. Whats even funnier is people taking your shitposting seriously. Keep it up dude.
Thats a world cup winning bike right there.
That being said, ill take 27.5 dh wheels. on boost, they're stiffer than 26 and 29, and the bottom bracket is below the axles unlike 26", thus lowering the center of gravity, which means MOAR corners.
*its not really the worst
Not sure why they wouldn't have just mounted it to the stay. Everything else about the bike looks sick though!
This sentence says it all. I've had this bike since May and love it more everyday.
Result: I did all the races with the Catalyst pedals, including especially the megavalanche, and my clipless pedals are always in the box, never mounted, never ridden.
The most important thing is to get the right shoe. Many shoes have a pre-curved convex sole which means you slide around in the middle of the pedal and don't get great contact with the pins. Five Ten Freerider Pro's are the best I have found to date, they are nearly completely flat from new and bed in quickly. If you have a good contact here, I think power output, grip, and balance is all improved.
Every video about brake influence on suspension is... fake, because the wheel is not rolling on obstacles.
That is... until I got to the bit that essentially said "if you don't like the way this bike rides you are a loser. It's so great even its negatives are actually positives. It's so great and I can ride it really well cos I'm so cool" Christ man. Your job isn't to tell people how f*cking cool you are or how this bikes foibles suit your awesomeness. No one cares about that shit. Your job is to review the f*cking bike.
By the time I'd finished reading the review I had lost all the "this bike might actually work for me" as it had been replaced by "I wish they'd get an actual reviewer to ride the bike so I can hear an unbiased opinion....
It's an honest review, and he doesn't remotely come off how you imply. I'd suggest looking at yourself and wondering why this article made you so angry to slander someone in the comment box. If you want to ask the same of me, well I just told you.
Did you actually read my comment? I basically said the article started really well. It seemed informed and gave his opinion. That part was great, and I think we agree there. Of course the reviewer needs to give their opinion. The entire review is an opinion and nothing more, and a great reviewer will have formed a full and comprehensive opinion about the entire bike, good and bad. Getting all hyped up on stoke and saying that a bike is perfect and anyone who disagrees sucks at life is not the same as writing a great review...
What baited me to comment was the bit where he basically tried to sell the bikes weaknesses as strengths and essentially said "if you don't agree with me that this bike can do no wrong then you suck and you are stupid and your mum smells of elderberries." All bike designs are compromises. There are no perfect designs out there, as it is physically impossible to design a bike that does everything well. It is the reviewers job to find where these compromises have been made, to explore them, then to discuss them in the review. If I just wanted to hear about how f*cking stoked and excited someone is about something, if I only wanted to hear one side of the story, I'd ask a 13 yr old. I want to hear the whole story. I want a full breakdown, warts and all. Thats why I read reviews on Pinkbike.
I missed the part where he called you dumb, untalented, and insulted your mom's fragrance. So who's really acting like a 13 year old.
You missed quite a lot. There is history to this which you may be unaware of. In particular the part where he discusses "rider forward handling". It's cool though. Paul knows how I feel, and we have spoken about our differing opinions. He's offered to take my opinions on board and I've apologised for calling him out in public. Your cape can rest easy
- Requires some adaptation to get the best out of the bike
- Falls off chairlifts and shuttle trailers and might not fit in your car or garage
- May make you ride too fast for your own safety"
Rounded write up? The first point isn't really a con, and the second two are jokes!
I'm sure it's a great bike, I like it. But he's essentially making out there are no downsides whatsoever. He even makes some statement about high pivots being the holy grail. This is not a balanced, cool headed clinical write up, it's a stoke fest. That's cool, I'm glad he's stoked on it and I'm sure that is because it is a great bike. But at some point a reviewer should step back from that initial high and make an honest judgement of what compromises have been made and where. Making out there are none at all just makes me less confident in the accuracy of the review. If I'm considering spending serious money on a bike and can't test every bike out there back to back on proper terrain, good quality reviews are all I have to go on.
It might be later into the travel but I would expect this to be the same - it is probably at its longest around 3/4 into the stroke before getting shorter again.
Just grab a handful of front brake.
EUR prices always include VAT/TVA, so the prices will be comparable.
Result: I did all the races with the Catalyst pedals, including especially the megavalanche, and my clipless pedals are always in the box, never mounted, never ridden, for sale.
I'm 6'1 with a +4" ape index, 33" inseam.
Thanks, Paul.
Also, I have been vocal about bikes being too small for years after being lucky enough to ride the new crop of bikes with much longer reach numbers before the majority of consumers. For example, in my First Look of the 2015 YT Tues I said was too small in L-size for people around or over 6', now they have gone up to offer an XL and XXL with a 495mm reach. When I rode the XXL Tues, that bike and setup felt too long, where the Commencal felt comfortable on everything I rode. Over the last 3-4 year bikes, in general, have become much longer and people try them and usually prefer something a bit longer than their previous bike. Actually, I can't rememeber any press release from the last two years where the new bikes haven't increased in length
www.pinkbike.com/news/first-look-YT-TUES-CF-Pro-2015.html
www.pinkbike.com/news/yt-tues-first-look.html