Commencal Meta 55 frame with 130mm fork?

yavoni

Hi guys,

Can you advise how a Commencal Meta 55 frame will perform with a 130mm fork? I'm after buying this frame and I think my 130mm fork (DT SWISS EXM130) meets the recommended fork length listed in Commencal's manual. I know the frame is designed for forks with 140mm travel, that's why I'm wondering how the bike will stand on the trails with a 130mm one. Please advise. Cheers!

rockmonkeysc

Don't buy the frame. They are pretty much the worst used frame choice. Cracks and failures are very common.
Google commencal 55 crack and see how many results you get!

robertpb

My Meta is 7 years old and the frame has had no problems. Only 1 year was there an issue but the amount of frames that broke were no different to some other makes problems in the past.

The problem was that it received a lot more internet coverage making it more front page news than it actually was.

rockmonkeysc

Everyone I know or have even met with one has had a frame failure.

yavoni

I know about the frame issues - I've been researching the frame in the last months. I would appreciate if someone can advise on the fork question though.

rockmonkeysc

I wouldn't. It's got quite a steep head angle by modern standards, a shorter fork will make it even steeper. It would take it to 69 degrees which is more pure xc bike than trail bike.

yavoni

But the recommended fork height based on Commencal's manual is 510mm and the EXM130 fork's axle to crown height is exactly 510mm. Which means that the geometry of the frame will not change, right?

rockmonkeysc

Then why are you asking? Just buy it.
You might want a roll of duct tape for trail side frame repairs as well.

yavoni

I wouldn't worry about that. Several years have passed since the defective Meta 55 frames. All frames that are currently for sale out there have passed the quality check of time, as they were enough used.

rockmonkeysc

No, most have had replacement rear ends, most have had more than one. They have just come out of warranty which is why loads have suddenly come up for sale over the last year.
To be fair to Commencal, they were pretty good at warranty replacement of cracked frames. Last time my mate got a new rear end they had run out of white ones so he had to have a black one! That was his third rear and he was on his second front end.

Lewis A

Unless they haven't been used very much...

The Rookie

yavoni wrote:

passed the quality check of time, as they were enough used.

Or were bought by an 'all the gear and no idea' people and barely ridden. The parts that failed weren't defective by manufacture but by design, so the surviving ones are just as defective.

gregwari

Hi

To answer all your questions:

Frame - it was the aluminium 2009 / 2010 frames with issues, welds on the top tube / head set that tended to split... I've got the carbon frame so not relevant to me and a friend runs the 2011 ali version and he's had no issues.

Fork - see tech manual, http://www.commencal.net/web_bicycles/t ... 011_en.pdf

You can run up to a 535 fork with no issue. For reference, I have a 150mm fox talas that Commencal spec'd with the bike which probably says it all in terms of not sticking rigidly to the 510 length. I've run it now and then at 120mm (when I first got the bike I used to put the Talas down to 120mm for climbs and then forget all about it). It feels like you'd expect, a little steep, a little less forgiving and and little twitchy. Long story short, if you run a 130mm fork the bike won't feel as plush or forgiving or capable vs a 140 or 150 fork.

rockmonkeysc

The swing arms broke on all year models, they only ever fixed the front end. Most of the failures I have seen have been between the drop out and the curve in the swing arm.
It's the one frame I wouldn't touch with a sh1tty stick, I would actually rather have an Apollo.