User
Welcome,
Guest
. Please
login
or
register
.
Did you miss your
activation email?
May 23, 2012, 04:47:32 AM
1 Hour
1 Day
1 Week
1 Month
Forever
Login with username, password and session length
Latest Poll
What is the main type of machine you use to surf the site?
Desktop
112 (28%)
Laptop
158 (40%)
iPhone
51 (13%)
Android phone
29 (7%)
Tablet
24 (6%)
Other
14 (3%)
Total Voters: 287
Commencal Owners Club
Forum
General Category
General Discussion
MBR Meta 6.2 review
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
« previous
next »
Pages:
[
1
]
2
Author
Topic: MBR Meta 6.2 review (Read 1612 times)
dgould
Flame
Posts: 333
MBR Meta 6.2 review
«
on:
February 12, 2009, 12:30:10 PM »
Not overly impressed with the rating of an 8!!
Best suspension platform, and a clear few hundred quid cheaper than the Orange/Lapierre but only an 8!!
Views hombres??
«
Last Edit: February 12, 2009, 12:33:03 PM by dgould
»
Logged
redtill
Combi
Posts: 95
Re: MBR Meta 6.2 review
«
Reply #1 on:
February 12, 2009, 12:46:46 PM »
Seems they prefer a slighty slacker head angle & less weight.Can't blame them really although commies are much better value
«
Last Edit: February 12, 2009, 12:51:41 PM by redtill
»
Logged
w00dy1980
Super Normal
Posts: 240
2010 Meta 55 VIP
Re: MBR Meta 6.2 review
«
Reply #2 on:
February 12, 2009, 01:19:58 PM »
Has anyone a link to this review?
Logged
steveb
Administrator
Meta
Posts: 2004
Re: MBR Meta 6.2 review
«
Reply #3 on:
February 12, 2009, 03:15:28 PM »
The mags have loved the Meta range for a few years now, too much so, but that was never going to last. Also MBR in particular have always had issues with the angles on the Meta 6. I recall last year MBR reviewed the 5.5.2 and the 5.5.xt in the same issue. The 5.5.2 got slated for having too low a BB and to steep a head angle, the 5.5.xt was raved about cus of the low BB and the tighter head angle. Go figure that one out!
Take what the mags say with a pinch of salt. Unless of course they say anything Commie is the best ever, in which case they're 100% right and you must buy one ;-)
Logged
www.realcycles.com
Commencal Dealer Of The Year 2007 & 2008
We ship Commencals all over Europe.
damo
Meta
Posts: 2230
Re: MBR Meta 6.2 review
«
Reply #4 on:
February 12, 2009, 07:27:24 PM »
WMB didn't favour the 6 either. They seem to like their light weight xc bikes more though.
Damo
Logged
2010 Commencal Meta 5.5 VIP
2007 Santa Cruz Chameleon
1975 minge
"We're here for a good time not a long time"
Colin McRae 1968-2007
cunning-stunt
Super Normal
Posts: 202
We all have more stars than Bong
Re: MBR Meta 6.2 review
«
Reply #5 on:
February 12, 2009, 11:06:19 PM »
I recall MBUK reviewing the 666 with an XC build using it for singletrack, and the score reflected that.
Different people have different opinions on things, and we all know we like our Commies so who cares what some journo thought
I rate the 6 as bloody perfect for my riding (as I'm sure every other 6 owner here does...brave person who spends 2 grand then calls the bike crap) so unless a reviewer can do the riding I do on the type of terrain I ride then their opinion doesn't really count for much to me.
I can understand non Commie owners seeing the score and thinking 'hmm should I?' but 90% of bikes get a 7 or 8 so it's by no means a bad score, just in with the rest.
Logged
cunning-stunt
Super Normal
Posts: 202
We all have more stars than Bong
Re: MBR Meta 6.2 review
«
Reply #6 on:
February 14, 2009, 10:02:53 AM »
Read the review last night. Didn't think the Commie came off too badly but seeing as they said they loved the Lapierre last year I knew it was going to win before I even read the bike reviews.
I noticed they didn't make such an issue of the weight of the Commie as they did with the 'Dale but I'm a little puzzled why it only got an 8 when they obviously liked the suspension design. Does the average rider really notice
slight
angle issues??
If the medium is 'short' (their words) I must have tiny pathetic arms like a T-Rex because I had to stick a 55mm stem on mine to get the reach feeling right.
You know what journos are like, they have to find faults. Even on 'perfect' bikes I've seen them say that the air fork isn't adjustable as a coil/the coil fork isn't as tuneable for rider weight as air..
Logged
cramaj
Flame
Posts: 341
Re: MBR Meta 6.2 review
«
Reply #7 on:
February 15, 2009, 12:24:02 PM »
Bike magazines should review in the following order - set up, ride, write review, measure geometry. This way they will not be influenced by a preconceived idea about what it should feel like according to geometry.
Also they do not tell you much about the terrain that it is ridden on. These bikes should spend a half day on a quality red route, a day on a long black route and have a few runs on a DH course. This will give a good cross section of what the bike is all about.
That said these guys ride a lot more bikes than us, and probably spend a lot more time in the saddle than any of us as well, so they should know what they are talking about. Of course you cannot take account for personal riding styles or general bike geometry preferences.
Lets face it most of us are biased to Commencal on this forum and I personally have nothing to compare my meta 5 against, unless I want to take my mates bikes down the hill - which I don't. I bought the meta 5 due to the reviews of journalist, so you've got to take the good with the indifferent and the bad I'm afraid. I know that my meta's good but do I know if its better than an Orange 5 or a lapierre spicy - nope. Do I care - a wee bit.
«
Last Edit: February 21, 2009, 11:10:44 AM by cramaj
»
Logged
Bippa
Flame
Posts: 352
Re: MBR Meta 6.2 review
«
Reply #8 on:
February 18, 2009, 12:23:18 AM »
they measured the head angle at 66.5' aswell, when commy say it's 67.5' in the slack setup
useless bloody mag people *rolls eyes*
Logged
damo
Meta
Posts: 2230
Re: MBR Meta 6.2 review
«
Reply #9 on:
February 18, 2009, 12:27:02 AM »
what, like this?
damo
Logged
2010 Commencal Meta 5.5 VIP
2007 Santa Cruz Chameleon
1975 minge
"We're here for a good time not a long time"
Colin McRae 1968-2007
cunning-stunt
Super Normal
Posts: 202
We all have more stars than Bong
Re: MBR Meta 6.2 review
«
Reply #10 on:
February 18, 2009, 04:40:46 AM »
Understand that Cramaj, but what wuld you say if I or any member here said it?
Logged
cramaj
Flame
Posts: 341
Re: MBR Meta 6.2 review
«
Reply #11 on:
February 21, 2009, 11:13:16 AM »
Quote from: cunning-stunt on February 18, 2009, 04:40:46 AM
Understand that Cramaj, but what wuld you say if I or any member here said it?
Said what? not with you Cunning?
Logged
cunning-stunt
Super Normal
Posts: 202
We all have more stars than Bong
Re: MBR Meta 6.2 review
«
Reply #12 on:
February 21, 2009, 11:57:06 AM »
I'm not with me either...brainfart moment I think. I have no clue as to what comment I was referring to!
Time to buy a Specialized
«
Last Edit: February 21, 2009, 11:59:43 AM by cunning-stunt
»
Logged
dgould
Flame
Posts: 333
Re: MBR Meta 6.2 review
«
Reply #13 on:
February 22, 2009, 11:17:03 AM »
Quote from: cunning-stunt on February 21, 2009, 11:57:06 AM
Time to buy a Specialized
There's no need for that type of talk!!! Someone call a moderator
Logged
Graham T
Super Normal
Posts: 211
Re: MBR Meta 6.2 review
«
Reply #14 on:
February 22, 2009, 01:22:08 PM »
Ban the unclean one
Logged
Pages:
[
1
]
2
« previous
next »
Jump to:
Please select a destination:
-----------------------------
General Category
-----------------------------
=> General Discussion
===> Pics & Vids
=> Rides
=> Technical issues
=> Users bikes
=> Buy & Sell
=> News
-----------------------------
Regional forums - To have a regional forum added please private message Steveb
-----------------------------
=> Spain
=> UK & Ireland
=> France
=> Canada
=> America
Loading...
TinyPortal 1.0 RC1
|
© 2005-2010 BlocWeb