I’ve been looking around for frame-only deals to upgrade from my hardtail and the Commencal Super 4 caught my eye. Gets good reviews and seems to suit my kind of riding (woodland singletrack plus the odd trail centre trip).
Anyway, to cut a long story short, I came across their warranty(pdf) on the website.

A few of the clauses caught my eye:

“Any naked frame (VIP frame) needs to be built up by an authorized COMMENCAL retailer. If this is not the case, any eventual warranty claim may be refused.”

“An authorized COMMENCAL retailer must duly validate the maintenance card enclosed herewith.”
(This has a 3 month service interval specified).

“The original parts must not have been replaced.”

“The warranty is void if:
…
– The bicycle has not been entirely assembled by an authorized COMMENCAL retailer.
– A non-authorized retailer has repaired the bicycle.
…
– Parts not supplied with the bicycle by COMMENCAL, or not provided for in the user’s manual, have been used.
…
– The original seatpost has been replaced.
– The frame is too big or too small for the customer.
…
– The bicycle has undergone alterations of components or the replacement of parts by parts other than those initially installed or recommended by COMMENCAL Bicycles.
– The bicycle has been used on «extreme» trails, such as those in MTB videos, trial circuits, ramps, performing leaps or following BMX circuits, going down steps or cycling on similar terrain.
…”

Now I may be being paranoid but this would seem to be a pretty broad range of exclusions that prohibit any owner tinkering or riding some trail centre descents I can think of.

Mandating the dealer build-up the frame-only deals seems a bit cheeky too.

I’m off so see if the other manufacturers have similar exclusions but in the meantime:
Does anyone have any experience in this area?
Is this typical of bike/frame warranties?

Presumably there is a HUGE difference between warranty claims that manufacturers have the right to refuse and those that they do refuse.

But yes, anyone reading that would have thought their bikes were fancy, fragile and only suitable for riding in car-parks.

I hope you’re right BD otherwise getting a Commencal warranty honoured will be a neat trick.

I don’t understand why they can’t just go with:
“If it’s a manufacturing fault we’ll sort it.
If you broke it please see our crash replacement prices.”

There you are: 2 lines, no lawyers and all the bases covered, I think 🙂

I’ve noticed loads of warranty replacement frames for sale lately, which to me says they seem to be hounoring the warranty but the frames are fragile….

I think the frames are fine is you stick to the right travel fork and use it for its intended purpose.

My 2007 meta is still going strong after 2 years of abuse including an alps trip where we mostly rode DH courses.

Some people on hear just spout out what the mags say and dont like Commencal anymore becuase their cool factor has gone down.

spout out what the mags say

too true. having been riding a commencal for about 2 year the trail centre comments have gone from – does it really ride like a little downhill bike to ooh are they not a bit heavy and flexy 🙄

Some of that is nonsense. Get something in writing from Commencal?

Remember your contract is with whoever you buy the frame from .

aaaahhhhh, bike lawyerese…..

The non-name stem that came as standard on my maxmax bike, (obviously built as and marketed as a jump bike) had a sticker underneath saying it was not suitable for aggressive off road riding, stunts or jumps.

Seems a pretty standard warranty document to me I would imagine all bike manufacturers have something similar.

I had a 5 year old specialized frame which cracked on the joint between the bb and the chainstay. I read the similar statement in their warranty about only being built up by a specialized dealer and was worried because I bought it as a frame only and built it up myself. Need not have worried because I mentioned this to the original retailer (Bikescene) and they said it shouldn’t be a problem – and it wasn’t – replacement sent FOC.