Kirk Pacenti Revolutionizes Short Stems... With a Hammer - Sea Otter 2015

Apr 19, 2015
by Richard Cunningham  
Pdent stem technology 2015

Pdent stem technology 2015

Pdent Technology

Kirk Pacenti, the infamous father of 27.5-inch mountain bike wheels, has patented, perhaps the simplest idea since the rotary string trimmer better known as the "Weed Whacker." It is called "Pdent Technology" and it is a 15-millimeter dent in the center of the handlebar that allows it to nest into the steerer tube. The end result is a low-profile stem which can be as short as 10 millimeters.

Pdent solves a problem that has limited stem lengths to 32 millimeters - which is the distance that marks the point where the handlebar meets the edge of the steerer tube. Before anyone starts shouting "Mondraker," a number of sub-30-millimeter stems currently exist - right down to zero-reach - but they must be made taller than optimal in order to provide room for the steerer tube clamp. Pacenti's solution gets the job done while maintaining the low-profile of a traditional shorty stem.

Pdent is a system that includes the dimpled handlebar and a matching stem. Presently, the system is only available from Pacenti, but he is actively seeking OEM partners who can take the concept to the masses. The CNC-machined dual-clamp stem is matched with a carbon bar. Prices and weights are not yet determined.
Pdent stem technology 2015
It is called a "swept radial cut" by engineering nerds, the Pdent is slightly more than banging a dimple into the bar so it will clear the steerer tube. The "radial" part refers to the profile of the dimple allowing the bar to be rotated in the stem clamp to provide a measure of adjustability.


Pdent
The darker the color, the lower the stress. This graphic, furnished by Pacenti, shows that most of the bending moments through the center of the handlebar terminate at the stem's handlebar clamps.


Offsets will be offered in 25 and 15 millimeters for starters, because Pacenti says that exceeding those numbers creates unstable steering as the grips of the handlebar move behind the steering axis. Fabien Barel concurs, relating that he tried zero-rise stems, but had to move the bar forward ten millimeters to stabilize the Mondraker's "Forward Geometry" steering.

Concerns about weakening the handlebar at the center where, theoretically, the bending forces are highest are unfounded, says Pacenti, who showed a computer-generated stress model that indicated the stem's two clamps arrest all the major bending moments, leaving the center of the bar almost unaffected by those forces.

Another concern is that customers are being asked to purchase a matching bar and stem for each of the two offset options. Pacenti says that he will offer bars with a ten and 15 millimeter dimple that will nest with his 25 and 15-millimeter offset stems. Logically, the deeper, 15-millimeter dimple would fit both stems, but Pacenti insists that doing so would eliminate the self-centering effect of the closely fitting bar. He also claims that the limited angular adjustment of the correctly matched Pdent stem and bar will prevent the bar from over-rotating should the stem clamps be under torqued.

Surely, those features are optimal, but in the same breath, neither are critical to the system's purpose of providing a shorter stem to the many riders and bike makers who believe that the option will turn in a better performance. If I were a customer, I'd probably buy the bar with the deepest dimple, knowing that I could upgrade to either stem option should I have guessed wrong.
Conventional sub 30mm stem
Sub 30mm stems have been around for a while, but they are typically 30 to 50 millimeters taller than conventional stems, because the handlebar must be positioned above the steerer-tube clamp.

Pdent stem technology 2015

So, what are my first thoughts about Pdent? It's a simple, "Why didn't I think of that?" solution for riders who want a sub-30-millimeter stem, because it maintains all of the other ergonomics of the bike's previous setup. Pdent also proves that it can be done, which should light a fire under the rear ends of other accessory makers to offer a similar product. Either way is a win for riders in need.

Contact Pacenti Cycle Design



Be sure to check out all of our Sea Otter Classic images.


163 Comments

  • + 176
 I can't hate on innovation but I predict this guy will be infamous for two reasons: 1) The death of 26" 2) Made millions off of denting a handlebar
  • + 73
 I'm just wondering, if I rotate my handlebars 180's and put on a 120mm stem, would that become -120mm and be the shortest stem? Would that make my bike handle better?
  • + 31
 Probably not, but you can start making willie like a god
  • - 21
flag wakaba (Apr 19, 2015 at 1:51) (Below Threshold)
 Rotating handlebar backward puts weightbias to rear. Good for sandy and slimy conditions. Forward - more reach and stack and grippier steering /braking. All done on a short thomson direct mount stem. No proprietary and expensive dent needed. Stupid solution...
  • + 93
 Do you reaaaly need a sub 30mm stem?.... I thought the best part of this was the fact that your bars will always be perfectly centered.
  • + 38
 The mechanics will love this innovation. No more fiddling around to get the bar centered.
  • + 24
 I cannot believe it actually took someone almost 30 years to devise this...."innovation"
  • + 87
 Kirk must be hoping to put a dent in the market.
  • + 26
 I wonder if any other ideas have stemmed from this.
  • + 71
 There goes my dented steerer tube idea.
  • + 32
 dimpled handlebars, narrow wide chainrings, steel coils that are lighter than titanium. i like how the most useful innovations lately have been the most simple, cheapest things to make.
  • + 69
 26 bikes will NEVER die.
  • + 22
 Certainly more innovative than Boost while not changing standards.
  • + 0
 Hahaha, I don't think Kirk Pacenti is responsible for 650B, French are!
  • + 3
 RING RING
"THANS FOR CALLING PACENTI, HOW MAY WE HELP YOU? "
"Hello, warranty department please. Yes, I'll hold"
  • - 2
 Or use narrower bar to make stem shorter...
  • - 4
flag fatenduro (Apr 19, 2015 at 17:08) (Below Threshold)
 It might be fine for up and down stress on the bar, but it will fa5igue and snap under braking pressure sooner than an equal thickness and weight normal bar.
  • + 3
 Fat how do you figure? The clamps are taking any normal/tangent forces in any direction, radially. That dimple will see next to nothing...
  • + 3
 Did someone remember the Azonic Hammer stem? it was shorter than 40mm and didnt work
  • + 12
 Am I the only one concerned about little to no movement in the angle of your bars?
  • - 5
flag fatenduro (Apr 19, 2015 at 22:21) (Below Threshold)
 @krashDH85 When you're braking, you push forward on the bars, not just down. Everything flexes a little, even a sold aluminum bar. So where the clamps hold the bar is like a fulcrum. Pushing forward on the bar pushes the clamp forward, but the exact middle of the bar gets flexed a little backwards like a lever. On a normal round bar, the aluminum exactly in between the two stem clamps is in tension at the back and compression in the front. But on the dented bar you'll have compression on the front and less tension on the back because of the dent. So under hard braking, the dent will gradually un-dent, and even with the steertube as a brace, the overall diameter in that crucial area is less than a normal round bar, aka it's weaker. Pacenti would have you believe the stem clamps take so much of the force, you don't actually need the full diameter at the back of the bar, but I disagree. (if you dare, with a hacksaw cut a quarter of your bar's diameter out from the back and feel how much more flex you'll get when pushing the bar forward under braking.) The dented bar is similar, just less extreme. So either you need more material to get the same strength as a round bar, or just expect the bar to fatigue and fail sooner than a similar roundbar.
  • - 1
 "but they must be made taller than optimal in order to provide room for the steerer tube clamp" / "they are typically 30 to 50 millimeters taller than conventional stems, because the handlebar must be positioned above the steerer-tube clamp." -Richard Cunningham. This is only the case for single crown forks. Obviously, for dual crown forks, the minimum height is the height of the top crown in the stack. Unless your stem can clamp to the inside of your steer tube, you will always need some surface area above the headset to clamp too (or press fit).
  • + 3
 will they're talking about normal short reach stems that don't need dented bars. pacenti dented the bar to make for a shorter rise stem than the "taller than optimal ones" currently available. But the stupidity of this whole thing is that he put a rise on the bar... when he could have just put the rise on the stem had a flat bar with no dent.
  • + 1
 @fatenduro Are you possibly overthinking this though? Think of an archway and how it has the ability to hold enormous weight by directing it outwards from the centre or keystone.
  • + 1
 @fatenduro the bars are made from carbon, therefor will not "un dent" as you put it, and can be manufactured to flex as much or as little as required. Also I am sure forces in every direction are applied to the bars when its tested using finite element analysis not just up and down.
  • + 1
 This will be the death of 24 inch wheels!
  • + 89
 Nice I'll be doing this to my carbon bars tonight
  • + 26
 The diagram proves it's safe!
  • + 6
 Just chuck them in the oven for 23 minutes at 200 degrees with a dash of oregano and a pinch of salt and you'll be able to form it around your steerer tube.
  • + 42
 I respect Kirk for doing his thing and kicking with it, his rims are fantastic but... so much talk about stem length, setting limits within 12-30mm and not a tiniest mention on sweeps of handlebar which can place grips within TWO inches back or forward in relation to steerer axis, pedals and saddle. Yes it can be that much, Renthal bars at 740 put bars 2 inches ahead of Easton Haven. Sweeps and hand/elbow position related to handlebar sweep? Then the width of the handlebar and relation to axis, pedals, hello, the way forces are applied... ay ay ay ay... what you are interested in is the 3 dimensional location of contact points of a man and bicycle, actually 4 dimensional, because handlebars tuuurn so the way grips , your hands change their position in relation to... how about your hips? makes a difference. So much philosophy and just the stem length? Really? If the system may feel too slow, it can also feel too quick isn't it?.

Look it's a fantastic product but please Kirk, be careful with all the philosophical background because it's nothing more but a clever way of making a short stem - we all like different things and sometimes we can't say why but things people tell us, that are good for us, feel awkward, even after 2 months of trying to get used to them Big Grin
  • + 1
 Waki, by that logic we should all be riding 110mm XC stems from the nineties with moustache bars in order to get the grips back to the steering axis. Yes, upsweep and backsweep affect grip location, and yes grip location is the real point, but it's just inefficient to have the stem move the grips forward only to have the bar move them back again. Better to have the stem the right length to begin with, as achieved by this system. It may not be the game-changer RC claims it is (remember "WTB revolutionizes the mountain bike rim"?), but it is a better solution to a particular problem than was previously available.
  • + 3
 ^^yes. upsweep and backsweep are more for ergonomics. much like if someone is bow legged or knock kneed and they adjust the canting on their ski boots. to some degree people with narrower shoulders can prefer more sweep with a wider bar. also some value bar tourque over bump absorbtion(to a degree/point moving your hands wider = more tourque where moving them closer together gives more arm flexion for absorbing bumps) so they can get a wider bar(to a degree) and just get one w more sweep. I like pacenti's idea but will I like the bars ergonomically. I have a syntace 30mm on my trail bike and a 28mm direct mount on my dh bike at the moment. if I like the pacenti bar I would like to try this system. not sure where exact perfect placement is but I think I'm within a few mm's Wink
  • + 12
 Jubbylinseed - I have no clue where in my comment did you get a clue that we all should be riding 110mm XC stems, please quote. Structurally it may be "inefficient" to move your stem forward but a matter of a fact is that people ride different bars, which give different hand position and affect your stance. If you run 35mm stem with very comfortable 12deg backsweep Syntace bars your grips will end up behind the steerer axis - how fun is that? Renthals are widely praised handlebars but they virtually add at least 10mm to your stem as compared to let's say Answers. Handlebar width not only changes the steering leverage, they also affect how your upper torso behaves, finaly your center of mass around belly button. So biomechanical factor when turning the bars cannot be ignored. So what I mean is, bars have pretty big influence on bike handling, yet vast majority of people take the complexity of grips-steerer axis-riders COM-BB relations and boil them down to stem length. Finally I personally ride with 60mm stem with 740 Renthals on my FS bike, because after many tests I found this to be the right balance of snappyness and stability, while Kirk and vast majority of people say that the shorter is better. Freaking schisophrenia - super slack, super long trail bike, with wheelbase longer than DH bike from 2012, but we put super twisty cockpit on it - you win the gold medal!
  • + 12
 im with waki here- the thing that this design will do (although its pretty clever) it eliminate the option of being able to roll the bars to tget the angle right for your wrists. thats a deal breaker for me ;s
  • + 4
 Yep. Agree with Waki. Stem can be too short, if you need less than 35mm I think your bike is probably too big. Longer stem can give more stability and will self centre when the front wheel starts to ping off stuff. You could argue it's good to have this option but then you come up against the ergonomic thing and no sweep options. Sounds like it'll sell to fashionistas who only need what's hot and don't care whether it's actually gonna benefit their ride. I guess if that's all you care about though it would be a benefit to you.
  • + 5
 In general I don't criticize this for being too short, it's a brilliant idea, I just got an impression after reading stuff on his website that the marketing pitch is too long for A such an easy to grasp feature and B without mentioning such a huge variable that handlebars present. That's it Big Grin
  • + 3
 Yeah I dig that, and agree with you mostly. I do think it's too short though and unnecessary. Your point about the sweep was where I relate, not many people remember that I don't think. Short stems seem all the rage at the mo...I think we should talk about how best to get desired handling characteristics rather than fixating on 'shorter is better'. I try to only post positive stuff these days and I seem to have failed here so my apologies to the community. Must try harder.
  • + 3
 "It is called a "swept radial cut" by engineering nerds, the Pdent is slightly more than banging a dimple into the bar so it will clear the steerer tube. The "radial" part refers to the profile of the dimple allowing the bar to be rotated in the stem clamp to provide a measure of adjustability."
  • + 1
 I've been waiting for manufacturers to offer some variety in their sweep offerings for years. More backsweep and upsweep naturally places you in an attack position while offering greater leverage than, say, Renthal or Chromag bars. I personally prefer 10 degrees and over but the wide bar revolution has actually negated that need somewhat. True, Syntace offers a 12 degree sweep model but that is actually too much. It has never made sense for me to see manufacturers offer a variety of stem lengths but just one option for sweep. Ideally, I'd like a 10.5 degree backsweep, 6 degree upsweep, 780mm bar, is that too much to ask?
  • + 3
 toothless - those measurements manufacturers give are totaly arbitrary, there is no way to measure those angles, I tried. I took photos of all my bars from the top trying to align the lens with steerer axis and shooting from larger distance, then taking the photo to CAD and there was no way to find what do they mean by backsweep angle, I measured them in all possible ways. What's funniest is that they can vary a lot on the same handlebar model basing on how much rise the bars have, check that out with Race Face bars, but them on top of each other in different rise options. Then flatbars totaly ruin this measuring game. I think if short stem lobby would actualy take two different handlebars and put them against each other, with one being in the bike, and second put next to the mount in the stem, they'd stop with that bullcrap that 40mm stem is too short but 50mm is ok.
  • + 3
 please summarize waki, that's too long to read
  • + 4
 Answer handlebars may have different geometry than Race Face or Chromag bars despite having same description 8deg upsweep 5 deg backsweep.
  • + 1
 Yeah, if we're to believe the specs then everyone's bars are the same sweep (or near enough) but they certainly are not. Interesting you found that even the same models can differ, Waki. That is new to me though not surprising.
  • + 3
 They are very near, but you know, when someone talks of 10mm differences in stem length in relation to everybody, every bar and every bike in the world I am cringing Razz
  • + 1
 Perfectly straight handlebars, no sweep and no rise. Then just focus on the stem length you want. I can't find any straight bars on the market. I'll have to go chop some rebar. Patent pending.
  • + 1
 Good point Waki, I always assumed that back and up sweep measurements were taken with the bulged center section perpendicular to the ground. I am speaking from anecdotal experience however, never having undertaken sweep measurements myself. Flat bars are of course a different game as there is not much of a center section to line up vertically to take measurements. But I'm quite tall and don't ride 29ers so flat bars have no appeal for this guy. Just wanted to point out that all this fuss about shorter stem length could be accomplished with greater handlebar sweep while keeping a 50mm stem length that would allow you to keep some weight on the front end for climbing the odd hill.
  • + 2
 I know it was a joke, but Kubaner's idea of a dented steerer tube would allow you to rotate the bars to adjust the angle of the grips. Quickly, can anyone tell me how to file a patent?
  • + 0
 @WAKIdesigns: Running a longer stem with a handlebar that moves your hand position backwards is not the same thing as running a short stem in the first place. Yes, the contact points are important, probably more important than anything else. But with a longer stem, weight distribution is different - just imagine a 200mm stem with a wildly bent mustache bar that brings your hands way backwards... the stem would still function as a lever on your steerer tube, the point where the weight is applied when you lean on the handlebars in this case is 200mm in front of your steerer tube...

Still, I totally agree that everybody should experiment and find out what combination of stem length, handlebar sweep and handlebar width works best for them.
  • + 1
 @FuzzyL No, @WAKIdesigns is right, the location of the hands is significant, not the position of the center of your bar. The lever is between your hands and the steerer, not between your bar and the steerer.

I never took time to check if all my bars are se same or not, I always chose 9° backsweep/6 or 7° upsweep, and now I have to verify them...
  • + 1
 FuzzyL - handlebar sweeps are about ergonomics of holding the bar, have to do with how your hand works (everyone will like something a tiny bit different, both in terms of stance and comfort, for instance I get pain in wrists on wide flat bars with little sweep) and will theoretically affect your stance by how they set wrist and elbow joints. Effectively the grip rotation in 3d space is what matters because this is where force is applied and transferred to the steerer tube. The bar could be curving in ridiculous ways and if grips only stay the same it would not affect your riding stance or weight distribution on the bike. The "curvature" created by stem length and handlebar sweeps anywhere between steerer axis and grips has only structural significance. Theoretically the shorter the stem and less swept handlebar the less flex there will be in the system.
  • + 33
 Can the bars be rotated ?
  • + 0
 Man, that's a really good question. I too would like to know.
  • + 88
 If only this valuable piece of information were literally captioned underneath a corresponding photo, in italics, in the article.
  • - 1
 Didn't read the caption under the pics cos they usually just repeat what is said in the main article.
  • + 15
 I somettimes just look at the pictures too Smile
  • + 8
 Heh, what do you know. These captions actually say something.
  • + 6
 "It is called a "swept radial cut" by engineering nerds, the Pdent is slightly more than banging a dimple into the bar so it will clear the steerer tube. The "radial" part refers to the profile of the dimple allowing the bar to be rotated in the stem clamp to provide a measure of adjustability."
  • + 30
 I can't imagine anyone needing to run a stem shorter than 35mm. What are the benefits?

It seems that if you need to run such a short stem, the problem could be with your frame sizing.
  • + 0
 quicker lane changes, quicker corner to corner steering. mitigates wheel flop of slacker headtube angles. stems are steering components not for fit. if someone doesn't have enough reach they need a new frame not new stem. just sucks that'll cost them a couple g's not a couple hun
  • + 43
 Because your wheels just got plus sized but you still somehow need to squeeze your bike in the car without having to fork out thousands for a new vehicle
  • + 5
 Ummm.... Stems can be both for handling AND fit. It seems people are unaware that fit and handling go hand in hand, especially as (but not limited to) the bike gets aimed more towards uphill efficiency than steep downhill runs.
  • + 3
 @won-sean... you forgot to qualify "for DH ..."
Downhill only accounts for 18% of the MTB market. For bikes that actually have to be pedaled for more than 30 seconds at a time, climbing performance & front end build height are serious considerations. On the vast majority of frames, head tube lengths increase with frame size, so there is a trade-off in upsizing frames.
  • - 1
 @Veloscente I wasn't being specific for dh. I run basically same stem length for both bikes. toptube is ever so slightly longer on trail bike and bar is only slightly higher on dh bike. I run my bars , it seems, a bit higher than most. its quick to bend your elbows for tech climbing at slow speeds and more crucial to not have to adjust a lot at higher speeds of the downs
@D-Owen- I guess we'll chaulk that up to personal preference. I like what kona did with the process. every size frame gets 40mm stem(I'd like it shorter but that's me). buy a frame with the right reach. there is variations but for yrs we've been sold stems that were way too long. if your 6"7' maybe you can run a long(40mm) stem. so I think stems should only be used as fit in the slightest amount. say 20-40mm. for most the 30mm is perfect
  • + 0
 Let me guess, you're 5'10" and most of your rides are less than 90minutes w/ less than 100ft of climbing per mile? There is absolutely nothing wrong with being gravity oriented & prioritizing downhill handling over climbing, but the setup you are describing is *not* suitable for all body types over extended trail riding where you earn every turn and it's not just the downhills that are steep & technical.
Go out and do a few 5hr rides with 10,000ft of climbing that includes extended tech climbs north of 20%. Ask yourself whether your current setup is ideal, or even desirable for this kind of trail riding. Better yet, bring along some buddies who are 6' or taller. Even my buddy who is a former DH pro uses a stem longer than 40mm on his new-school geometry trail bike.
There are many variables, but "just get a bigger frame" is a solution that is of limited help unless you are willing to make major compromises in bar height.
  • + 1
 haha. ya no hills or tech climbing in revy. I thought a stubby stem helped in the super tech climbs. a couple more yrs and maybe i'll figure it out
  • + 2
 Long front centre and shorter stem=stability. Longer wheelbase with more direct steering negating any drawbacks of this. Forward geometry works in spite of how some were put off by the looks of the Mondraker, and this seems to answer that drawback. A longer TT is also better for climbing, wheel further in front and will not lift. There are no draw backs and 90% of people are riding bikes that they will look back on as tiny within the next ten years.
  • + 1
 ^^boom. nailed it. cheers brother
  • + 1
 Sorry, there are always tradeoffs. Just because you are compensating for them & viewing the results through rose-colored gravity goggles doesn't mean they're not there. Majority of even newschool trailbikes increase length of seat tube & head tube with increased top tube length: this starts to cut into your range of dropper motion & puts your bars higher up. The former limits clearance for descending, the later decreases stability while climbing. Other tradeoffs: more front triangle flex & weight. Frames can be beefed up to combat the former, but that exacerbates the later. Those running a 30mm stem for descending reasons may not give a sh*t, but that doesn't mean it's not a tradeoff.
Putting the "wheel further in front" does not limit front wheel levitation. That is determined by your ability to *weight* that front wheel. Steepening seat tube angles helps get you part of the way there, but a shorter stem works against this.
It's simple math: my new XL Santa Cruz has a 25" top tube. My previous bike had 23.5." Both have the same 73 degree seat tube angle. Proper pedaling dynamics determines my saddle position relative to BB. I can knock 35mm off my stem length without compromising climbing performance. Anything beyond that is trading the up for the down.
Pick your poison, but don't try and sell everyone else the miracle Koolaid.
  • + 2
 You pin point the same issues I have to be fair. I've just bought a Bird Aeris frame as it was pretty much the only option, other than another Mondraker, for a bike with a long front centre without a large increase in bar height and seat tube height. You pin point key issues, but surely with more developement bikes can be designed to answer these trade offs? Also, your reference to gravity related rose tints is fairly presumptious. I go out on long, all day rides with a great deal of ascending, and thus far, the Mondraker Foxy XR which I've just sold was the best climbing bike I've owned while also being great on the downs.
  • + 17
 Any mechanic that struggles with centering a bar needs to reconsider professions
  • + 14
 Awesome bit of kit....My brain can't really handle this level of genius.
  • + 2
 I actually think it its brilliantly simple. And even though it is a simple idea, it is innovative. I'm backin' it.
  • + 7
 Ahhhh FEM images. So easy to produce, so hard to get right. I wonder how much work they put into that simulation (especially boundary conditions) if they didn't even bother to use a proper color pallette...
  • + 4
 And we have no information about the wall thicknesses and materials used in the simulation, as well as applied force. The stem will be the fixed point, but it would be much nicer to show us how they modeled it. Didn't even put units on it as well!
  • + 8
 LOL people really try to patent everything. Even ideas that have been used for thousands of years.
  • + 11
 Yep, I wonder if I bent my handlebar in a crash, should I start paying Kirk money for using his "technology".
  • + 4
 Trouble is, if you don't protect your idea with a patent, someone else surely will. So it sort of forces people to, just in case their idea becomes the "next big thing". Tons of examples of people striking it rich with other people's designs.
  • + 2
 True that @ kingsx. If you have a good idea that is worth patenting (and if you have the money for it), it is the smartest thing you can do.

Even though the regular Joe might not see it, but wherever there is money, greedy money wolves will eat eachother and mainly the little ones alive. If you don't patent it, other companies will already be selling it while you're still at the point of trying to find the right distributors. Yes, the cycling industry is also filled with companies who would gladly f*ck you over and make all the money with your idea.
  • + 5
 I wonder if this kind of logic could be added to frames to give triple clamp forks more space to move, instead of external bumpers that reduce movement? Also, the rotary string trimmer is called a Strimmer to anyone outside America.
  • + 3
 Unless you're from New Zealand, in which case they're called "Weed Whackers, mate"...
  • + 8
 Weed whackers or whipper snippers over here, eh?
  • + 2
 I stand corrected, As a professional gardener I use them all the time, mainly for edging or cutting long grass before mowing. For areas covered in weeds I would normally use a brush cutter (one with a blade) What do you call them?
  • + 7
 weed eaters anyone?
  • + 4
 Funny, I've always called them Weed Wackers...
  • + 1
 If you were to do this to the frame I don't think you'd see enough benefit against your disadvantages. To achieve the same stiffness with a dimple in the top tube and down tube more material would need to be used (because the diameter of the tube would be smaller-reducing stiffness). You'd get a few degrees extra steering, but you'd also get higher production costs and higher weight or lower strength, and I don't think that's a trade most people would want.
  • + 1
 Revanchist I see your point about strength/stiffness. It was just a thought, something to combat my biggest gripe with triple clamp forks
  • + 2
 I'm with macross, the string kind I have always called a 'weed whacker". Guigui, I have always thought of what DJM is calling a brush cutter as a "weed eater" (the metal spinning blade of death). Funny how many names there are for such a generic tool.
  • + 1
 Gooldylocks and macross87, I did point out in the original statement that I believed they are called strimmers outside America, knowing they have the weed whacker name there already.
  • + 8
 More like "patent bending".... Big Grin
  • + 6
 That is really unnecessary and useless...We don't care about this few length....Do we ?
  • + 7
 That logo needs centering in the last pic.
  • + 3
 For the sake of clarity, I would like to reiterate 2 points.

1. The bars can be rotated. The "dimple" was designed to accommodate head tube angles between 63* and 69*, plus a few extra degrees of rotation on either end of that range, to fine tune bar position.

2. All pre-production bars have passed CEN testing.
  • + 2
 Motorcycles and motocross bikes are about 30mm bar to stem equivalent. Therefore this 'innovation' which for heavens sake should not even have been patentable is pointless. Plus the fact that you cannot rotate your bars for individual taste. I thought of this idea but dismissed as a bad idea as probably did tens or even hundreds of other people, to think someone could actually make money from it is insane. Ah and the same guy that had the idea of using 1cm larger wheels, makes sense. There is seriously something wrong with patent law, hope this 'idea' fails hideously as it deserves to.
  • + 2
 Cool idea, but I personally like the 35-55mm setups I have.

The bars sweep would be set, a little too far forward or back and the bar would contact the steerer.

Under a heavy impact where a conventional bar would turn within the stem (yeah your bar shouldn't turn in the stem, but we've all had it happen) this bar would impact the steerer and being at the farthest point from the ends of the bars would have a pretty high leverage ratio. Depending on the bars back/up sweep a 2" rise bar would have like a 4-5 to 1 ratio. Damaging or denting the top or bottom of the "dent" would be a real concern in my opinion.
  • + 4
 Next trend: Bars placed behind the stem
Next next trend: No more bars. Use clip ons like the sports motorcycles.
  • + 1
 i like the idea because it makes for exact centering of the handlebar for easy installation, no thinking or figuring. this coupled with a handlebar of just the precise bend the riders likes will be a fantastic piece of tech...however this dimple doesn't allow the handlebar to be rotated in the stem clamp..... the current technology is extremely ueeful since it allows the rider to rotate the handlebar slightly fore or aft, which if anyone is like me can be a deal breaker about riding a bike, if the handlebar sucks simply can't ride to my optimal ability...
  • + 1
 I like the idea of how you can now ride shorter stems, without having some shitty flatland solution where your bars are above your steerertube.

This idea is nothing for me, as I prefer stems around 50-70mm (I even don't like the feel of 35mm), but it's still a good idea and I'm sure there are many people out there super happy that this product will come onto the market Smile
  • + 1
 Absolutely stupid. It's like those roadie bars that are integrated stem and bars...it works GREAT if you're happy with the sweep and rise of the bar being in THAT position, but what if yu like your bars ran a certain way...you're screwed. I guess it's good for the guy who runs their bike how Pacenti wants it to be ran...but uhh...definitely not for everybody.
  • + 2
 I had this exact idea about 2 years ago, but I though it was shit as ppl wouldn't be able to rotate the bars. How about just building a headset spacer into the middle of a bar, then you'd have a zero mm stem.
  • + 5
 Proof that just because you can, does not mean that you should.
  • + 1
 Just to throw my two cents in, I'd like to say that does make sense in some applications. I broke my elbows a few years ago and have a slightly limited reach in my right arm. I've been looking for a solution to help with that and so far have been using a 35mm stem with the bars leaned back. It works alright but I still finish most rides with pain in my shoulders from having to compensate for my reach. I personally can't wait to see these come to market.
  • + 1
 Cool I guess, but I heard 130mm atac and purple ringlé stems we're making a comeback!

Ehh, sounded good in my head. Not so funny typed... I'm ashamed!

Unless, some-one thought is was funny... Ehh you guys won't read this way down here. dang it!
  • + 1
 Every time RC identifies a "game changer" or "new standard" i pray it dies so my bike doesn't become completely useless and incompatible with new parts. The last new standard that was good was a tapered head tube and i think that was way back in 2009. Go die in hell 15mm axles there is nothing wrong with 20.
  • + 3
 I hate patent law. He should get a patent for his tool design, but not denting a bar.
  • + 5
 Can he get a patent for being a tool?
  • + 3
 Have fun living in your dream where you don't need to patent shit. In reality companies are standing in line to fuck you over and steal and start mass-producing your idea. You loose all your investments, and all the money goes to them. It's the harsh reality.
  • + 0
 @ Mattin, yeah so you start your own company if you have such a good idea, dumbass. Then you make what you make while you can & capitalize on the fact that your name becomes synonymous with an idea. Even better if it's actually a good one. Patents are one of the many greed related evils in the world. Apple thinks they own the rectangle, Horst Leitner thought he should own the idea of putting a pivot on a chainstay, C-dale thought they should own the word "Freeride", Special Ed thought they should own the name "Roubaix", media companies think they own the state of storage devices in consumer's electronics, car companies think they should be paid for the free advertising they get in video games like Need for Speed. :s

"Patented" is no more than a marketing term most of the time 'cuz half the shit that's patented is totally f*cking stupid, like this handlebar.

It's a f*cking crock of bullshit & you're a dope. There's a greater good than the greed of one person that should be everyone's priority. Multiple entities can easily profit from the same thing, the world does it all the time. No one has a patent on the bicycle, the car, the computer, the TV etc. & a shit ton of separate entities (especially in the bike industry) obviously do just fine financially.

Get your head outta your ass.
  • + 0
 Wow you claim to be 34 years old but you act like an 8 years old retard? No need to swear and call names. Calm down dude, something is seriously wrong with you. You seem like that one person who everyones hates, has no friends, and will never be appreciated. Makes sence though with your messed up attitude. This will not get you far in life. At age 34 I expected you to know more, but sadly there are too many semi-retarted people out there like you. Glad I don't have to put up with you in real life, you sound terrible to be around.

To get back on the argument, it's not that I like patent. It's just that sadly it is very often neccessary to survive in business.

Actually I have my own company and I'm about to start a second one aswell. I studied marketing at the uni and know many people who had their own companies and got f*cked over by the big guys. They invested all the money, and the big guys stole their ideas and started putting it into production before he was actually able to start selling it.
Another good example is Kickstarter. Any idea how many companies have people to check all those ideas everyday to find something they can steal and start creating? Many big guys can easily spend ten thousands on releasing a new product, so as soon as one of them sees your idea, you with your €2000-3000 budget have lost the battle.

In the two years I've had my company I can't even count how often clients have tried to f*ck me over by not paying. When the job was done, suddenly so many of them never replied emails or answered my phone calls. But if they play hard, I'll play the game with them. As soon as my debt collecting agency called them, I always received the money within 24 hours. The game is hard, so to survive you have to be able to be hard aswell.
  • + 1
 ''No need to swear and call names''

''You seem like that one person who everyones hates, has no friends, and will never be appreciated. (...) but sadly there are too many semi-retarted people out there like you.''

sorry i had to
  • + 2
 Haha good point guigui333 Smile .
What I ment was that we were having a perfectly normal discussion until 'free-ride forever' out of nowhere started swearing against me and calling me names etc, purely for having a different view about the subject. I have no idea what was wrong with him for doing that.
I indeed should not have lowered myself to his level though.
  • + 1
 I like the "This American Life episode about patent law: www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/441/when-patents-attack
  • + 1
 hammers are my favorite tool, you'd think I would have come up with that. I usually look on new technology and super hyped innovation with a lot of skepticism, but this looks cool.
  • + 0
 Jeebus. Just make top tubes 1/2" shorter like they used to be. Then you can fit on a bike with a range of stem sizes, instead of having a silly short stem to keep from having a backache after riding the thing for 15 minutes. Ugh! Fashion made the problem, and now we have to have an engineered solution to fix the problem that doesn't need to exist in the first place.
  • + 2
 Another dumb thing from another dumbass.

Just go away Placenta. Please, stop wrecking our sport so you can profit off of it. :s
  • + 4
 Thought April fools had come and gone
  • + 1
 I always wondered why they never just made the steer tube square so that putting your stem on would be straight every time...
  • + 1
 I like the idea of not needing to center the bar. But 35mm stem is the shortest I need. I'll use the idea and make a reverse-dent in a bar to center it easily.
  • + 1
 Can we also talk about whatever donkey set up that stress plot? Why in gods name did he go to power level 700 so the entire thing looks blue.
  • - 1
 Just ride the bloody bike....

It's a gimik to make money. Nobody outside a lab will notice a damned bit of different at all.

I ride bikes from my azonic ds1, santa cruz v10 and some oldies like a dk bmx.

I couldn't give 2 shizz where the handlebars are.... Other than they are comfortable and within reach.....

Ponces with "the latest kit" are just that........

Get off your ebay/chainreaction accounts and ride.
  • + 2
 genius. simple and effective unlike some other new standards. *cough cough boost cough 27.5+ cough
  • + 2
 I just put a dent in my down tube. Can I patent this as a ground clearance maximization technology (gcmt)?
  • + 1
 Thats pretty dang simple Whole lot of fore head slapping going on. Why the need for such a short stem? Is it this trend towards longer front centers?
  • + 1
 I think tht this solution is hilarious. Great, but hilarious. Why did it take this long? Well no one ever was thinking about it. Awesome idea.
  • + 3
 Don't fix it if it ain't broke
  • + 0
 He isn't fixing anything. He's creating more options. Creating is more options is good. If you need it you can buy it. If you don't need it then you don't buy it. Some people win on this, but no one loses.
  • + 2
 I don't understand why this is necessary. Why not just have 15mm more back sweep or whachacallit?
  • + 2
 They have missed the opportunity for a joke. The "Patent Pending".. they should call it "patent bending"
  • + 1
 *Padent bending
  • + 0
 This is great, it would be wonderful to preserve the Forward Geometry handling while not having to adjust my handlebar height with a saw... Mondraker take note! that's the right stem for my next Dune.
  • + 1
 Pointless, because there will still be a limitation as to how far back the bar can go.
  • + 1
 I am filing a patent pending stem with the half tube to make bar centering automatic.
  • + 1
 Why not just integrate the bars right into the side of the stem, then you can have 0mm stem :-).
  • + 2
 shiz gettin old ,, isnt Apr fools over
  • + 1
 Im no engineer. But that dent might be the the 1st to snap when your bar clips a tree at speed.
  • + 1
 Unlikely because its the clamps that take all the force into the rest of the bike Yes its a weakened area because it loses the constant OD, but I dont expect to see a broke one in a hurry
  • + 12
 If only they had a FEA calculation picture in the article showing where the streets on the bars actually located.
  • + 3
 yeh.......go for a gap between a stone wall that's too narrow.........and your bars break off to save your knuckles.........and brakes. Brakes are expensive :-)
  • + 6
 Crash safe crumple zones for bikes. The future is now :-)
  • + 2
 Why not make them one piece then? You can't rotate the bars either way...
  • + 2
 If you read the full write up pdent.pacenticycledesign.com you'll see you can actually rotate the bars a few degrees either direction.

Pinkbike should just post the whole write up from Pacenti. Very thorough, well thought out, and made me really want to try this setup out. Pretty content with my 35mm Race Face setup, but a 17% reduction in stem length might be perfect.
  • + 3
 Nope nope nope
  • + 1
 My face after having expectations on this post unbeknownstrecordings.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/deeds1.jpg
  • + 1
 Don't be stupid If you want your stem this short your bikes the wrong size.
  • + 1
 I don't get it? If they wanted to have a zero-rise stems why would you have riser bars?
  • + 1
 Did someone remember the Azonic Hammer stem? it was shorter than 40mm and didnt work
  • + 1
 Dear RC, "patent pending" ≠ "has patented".
  • + 2
 More like Patent Bending
  • + 1
 Is this just a really late April Fools Day article?...
  • + 0
 30mm is long modern geo and stems will get shorter, Kirk is steering in the right direction.
  • + 1
 Well that doesn't look at all like the Mondraker On/Off 30mm stem
  • + 1
 Pdent! I'm beginning to like the sound of that
  • + 1
 What happens when steer tube diameters change?? I sure that's next!!
  • + 1
 Um, guys .... its 19th of april, not 1st
  • + 1
 agreed. this is stupid.
  • + 1
 Wondering what the specs are on that bar?
  • + 1
 woaw a revolution seriously ?? just no
  • + 1
 Jog on..
  • + 1
 INNOVATION!!!!!
  • + 0
 No purpose for dirt jumpers if you can't barspin...
  • - 1
 Great idea and short stems are the future! Shame they have to insist on making the bar out of bloody carbon.
  • - 1
 Cool

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2019. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.081166
Mobile Version of Website