Commencal Launches Mixed-Wheel 2022 Meta SX
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.
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
• 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
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.
Meta SX Signature $5,999 USD.
Meta SX Ohlins: $5,799 USD.
Meta SX Team: $5,199 USD.
Meta SX Essential:$3,999 USD.
Meta SX Ride $3,299 USD
Meta SX Origin $2,999 USD
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.
Meta Power SX Signature: $7,999 USD.
Meta Power SX Essential: $6,599 USD.
232 Comments
(not full X01 either)
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...?
Im still happy with my sketchy NX kit ;-)
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.
It is the primary reason I like knolly over almost every other brand.
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.
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?
You still hear about how the "industry" killed of 26" when the truth is they were sitting on the sales floor unsold.
So because someone can’t manual it’s caused by riding a 29er? That’s amazing.
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.
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.
What other products tries to demand pmt 8 months before delivery?
Edit: even with a shop brand, it depends on brand/shop how much up front you may have to pay up front.
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.
Are you able to shed light on this query (above) from @rallyimprezive
Thanks
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I wish chainstays were longer for the bigger sized bikes
Most bikes around medium size ride really wel
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.
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%).
I do love some of the armchair theories about weight distribution though.
420 (pew pew pewww!) is short haha. 433 is short-ish, but pretty normal. 440 is medium range I'd agree there.
I don't think all bikes "need" long chainstays. I certainly wouldn't want 460mm stays on a dirt jumper or anything like that
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I wish my bikes had em
Adjustability for da win
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.
am.jpmorgan.com/us/en/asset-management/institutional/insights/market-insights/eye-on-the-market/dude-where-is-my-stuff
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.
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.
Bike MFG's would look at warranty claims Failure Analysis and strengthen weak spots. I'd guess wall thickness?
You should ask Brendan Fairclough why he chose to run his mullet in the LONGER chain stay mode...
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.
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...
Hello Specialized Status 160.
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.
www.bikesonline.com/2021-polygon-siskiu-n9-dual-suspension-mountain-bike
My guess is that it will be like a Zeb but with motion control damper unit.
Fork / shock/ drivetrain / tires
Cheap!
Get a grip!
Join Pinkbike Login