Forum menu
No it's not. There is no way a mtb frame under the 6kg mark is fit for MTBing.
So all the standards Including CEN 14766 are wrong and a waste of time then?
Iain1775, not sure what your agenda is, do you Sell Commencals or something ha ha.
Iain is a mod on the Commemcal Owners Club site. Other than that he has no vested interest in Commencal and his day to day job is completely outside of the bike industry.
I have to say that as the second hand owner of an out of warranty 2009 Meta 5 that cracked in the usual places, I experienced prety good service from Commencal. I was ofered a crash replacement deal, which I accepted. When the frame arrived it was a foc warranty replacement 2011 model.
OP, I don't think anyone's disputing what you're saying but for whatever reasons, peoples experiences in general seem to differ from yours.
Real cycles used to be a Commencal seller though no more. It's possible that they have some swingarms left. After 2009 I believe they had loads from from breaking bikes to supply replacement front triangles to fulfill warranty claims. May be worth giving them a bell.
i'm another victim of commencals (lack) of warrenty.
i had a 2006 meta 5
1/ frame cracked at the water bottle bosses , new front triagle after 7 weeks
2/ 3 months later the new frame had a catastropic failure at the seat tube, another 8 week wait for a new front triangle
3/ rear drop out on the drive side snapped clean off, ,they refused a replacement claiming it was crash damage (its difficult not to come off a bike when the rear wheel has wrapped its self around the swingarm.
just for comparison the next bike i bought was a 2007 trek ex9, i just mentioned to the owner of the bike shop that the paint was a bit flakey on the top tube and i had a brand new frame withing 3 days .