Descending Pedaling the Meta 29 to the top of a climb is like using super fat powder skis to access a remote peak – there's more effort required initially, but it's worth it when gravity takes over. I channeled my inner
Grave Digger on countless occasions, dropping my heels and letting the Meta plow through whatever obstacles lay ahead. It has a solid yet plush feeling that makes it easy to launch into nasty looking sections of trail without needing to worry too much about the outcome. As long as you keep hanging on to those sticky grips, there's not much that'll faze this beast.
The combination of the Meta's extra heft and coil suspension does mean that getting airborne does require a little more muscle – it's more challenging to pop off natural doubles than it would be on a lighter, air-sprung machine. On bigger jumps taking flight wasn't an issue – just like a DH bike, with enough speed and a big enough lip you can launch as high as you'd like aboard the Meta. I did find the bottom of the bike's travel every once in a while, but the suspension design is progressive enough that this was a rarity rather than a regular occurrence. The Meta kept its composure on steep rock rolls as well, aided by the big rotors front and rear. That extra rear braking power does accentuate the amount that the back end squats under heavy braking, but there was always enough traction to remain in complete control.
I don't have a staunch position in the long or short chainstay debate – that number is only a part of the equation when it comes to how a bike rides, but in this case the Meta's short back end fit the overall manners of the bike very well, keeping it quick in the corners, and facilitating rapid direction changes. Once it's up to speed it's more nimble than you'd expect, and I was surprised by just how well it could bob and weave through the bermed turns on the twistier trails in the Whistler Bike Park.
Part of me does wish that Commencal had gone a little more radical with the Meta's numbers - after all, I don't think anyone's going to be taking this machine on mellow trail rides, at least not on purpose, so why not kick back that head angle a bit and stretch things even further in order to position it even further into the downhill realm? That being said, I felt totally at home dropping into the steepest, roughest trails I could find -- as it is the Meta is more than capable when the going gets gnarly.
Commencal definitely pushed the boundaries of how wide they could make the Meta's back end, and I did manage to knock the inside of my right knee (I ride left foot forward) on the seatstay a few times, and every once in a while my calves would rub it slightly while climbing, usually if I was running flat pedals and not paying much attention to my foot position. This won't be an issue for everyone, but it seemed worth at least a brief mention.
Now don't go and look at my bike. I don't want you to hurt your eyes. I do have a bottle mount but am currently not using them. Sorry for that .
www.instagram.com/p/Bh9ygr7Hl3-/?hl=en
Some one please bring the real weight of top model, this is not fair...
I have this bike and it pedals great. I think so many people are just out of shape and yeah definitely a bunch of whining little pussies. I was able to pedal it 10km without stopping once and was not even the slightest bit tired.
But if we keep discussing this minor issue, @mikelevy is going to need to bust out his calculator again and redo his word count math.
But if doing so you discard bikes that can makes you need less water (because of a lighter frame, or whatever), is the presence of WB mount still a rational choice, in particular when there is only room for one small 21 oz/620 ml WB on the frame ?
Do you often go to ride with only 620 ml of water on you ?
If not, where do you put the extra water ? If it is on the bike then do you discard all bikes with less than two WB mounts ?
What if changing your shock to get a better ride (like upgrade for a X2 ) preclude the use of a WB ?
All the more that there is a lot of after market solutions to put a water bottle on your bike (wolftooth B-rad, etc...).
Of course consumers do not behave like rational beings but discarding a bike on the sole WB mount criterion is the less rational thing I ever heard...
Maybe a bit of provocation from you ?
It would be absolutely fantastic (can't emphasize how much) to hear about the water bottle cages / water bottles / water bottle + cage combos that PBers reckon work. I'd love to go for a ride with weight off my back (as well as the metaphorical weight that always disappears on a ride of course ????).
Any top tips out there (or chance of a PB article, given it's such a hot topic)?
Estimated weight is coming in at 31.5lbs for:
Aluminium frame
150mm lyrik
Super deluxe coil RCT
XT drivetrain with e13 wide range casette
XT brakes
DT Swiss XM 1501 i 30 wheels
2.5 minion exo front
2.5 aggressor dd rear
Price around $4500
I went from 35.5lbs down to 29.5lbs when I got my current trail bike and it’s a crazy difference in climbing especially long days.
My DH bike with DH casing tires, flat pedals and a DHX2 coil is just a hair over 35lbs.
Overall, I would take the Capra CF/Pro/Pro Race and throw DD or DH casing tires and call it a day.
Anyway, good comparison bit, thanks for that (coming from a happy meha 290 owner).
The 'top-end' Signature trim Fox equipped model has a house brand cockpit and lesser E13 wheels. The brakes are 4 pot XTs, but brakes are a personal preference for most people.
Everything else, but the suspension(obviously) is the same.
The suspension on both bikes compete directly with each other and are top of the line. I'm a Fox guy through and through, but I would buy the Team model no question. Then I'd take that $400 difference and buy a set of Code Rs or RSCs and call it a day.
I ride a meta V4.2 and really want to try this bike. For what it is worth though, the 4.2 is a great bike. Mine is built with not the lightest components and has never been on a scale what I can tell you is that in the last week I have been on a cross country race pre-ride and ridden an enduro race. For me it is all about the rider. I spent years putting my bikes on and off scales trying to squeeze out pounds and ounces wherever I could, using single ply tires and the like in the end its just not worth it you end up running something that you either can't fix because its too niche in most places or something you don't want to fix because it is too expensive.
Also, my size large 4.2 will fit a 750mL bottle inside the frame so to me it is hardly something riders need to be aware of on that bike. I understand the coil shock will provide you with less space however I still think most shops "small" bottle should fit no problem.
Nice to read this review but it would have been cool to have both this and the 4.2 reviewed by the same person RC did the 4.2 and complained that alloy frames are noisy and the bike doesn't climb.
This in not what I expected form AM bike :/
Do you know how much the frame weighs? My old AM29 frame weighs 4kg (w. damper, L).
What about vs the 29 inch enduro or the evil wreckoning?
+1
All my bikes but my Honzo are pressfit. Guess which one I ride the most...
The only pressfit BB I've come to hate is the Praxis works units because they get noisy and have to be replaced, but they're specific to Praxis works.
My personal bike uses BB92 and I used the Wheels Manufacturing angular contact setup and installed it with threadlocker, and it has been silent and smooth in two years of use.
I guess the moral of the story here is GET THE RIGHT TOOLS, DAMMIT
I had the previous version of the Element (with PressFit) for two seasons and it saw one BCBR and so. many. miles. The newer version was around for most of a year as well
Which one is it?