For those who are joining the conversation, PDent is literally a dent in the center section of the handlebar that allows the fork's steerer tube and Pacenti's carbon handlebar to occupy the same space. Without the dent, the shortest that a conventional stem that can be made is about 32 millimeters before the bar and steerer tube touch. "Conventional" is the keyword here, because shorter stems are presently available that place the handlebar above the steerer tube, but at the expense of a ridiculously tall handlebar height. So, designer Kirk Pacenti's patented PDent solution is to dent the handlebar in a place where stresses are actually quite low, in order to create stem lengths in the neighborhood of 25 to 15 millimeters that share the same low profile as the 50-millimeter shorties that all-mountain and enduro riders presently know and love. PDent Bar and Stem• Stem: CNC-machined aluminum, black anodize, four-bolt clamp, 15 or 25mm extensions
• Steerer diameter: 1, 1/8"
• Clamp diameter: 31.8mm
• Handlebar: Carbon, 31.8mm clamp area, 8-degree sweep/5-degree up, 15mm rise, 800mm width
• Weights: Handlebar - 220g, stem (25mm) - 140g
• MSRP: TBD (Apx. $180 USD for bar and stem)
• Delivery: January, 2016
• Contact:
Pacenti Cycle Design Pacenti sells the PDent stem and handlebar as a combination - or we should say, "will sell," because no MSRP has been published as of this moment, and delivery is scheduled for January 2016. We received production versions to test, so when they do hit the stores, this is one combination that you will actually be able to purchase. Pacenti intends to engage OEM customers before he makes a less expensive aluminum handlebar and a more manufacturing friendly forged-aluminum stem. Presently, handlebars are carbon fiber only and sold in 800-millimeter widths with a 31.8 millimeter clamping diameter. PDent stems are beautifully machined from aluminum, with a four-bolt clamp to fit 1 1/8-inch steerers. Our test stem was a 25-millimeter model and, as mentioned, a 15-millimeter stem will also be available. Weights on our scale were 220 grams for the bar and 140 grams for the stem, which is lightweight for an all-mountain combo.
Pacenti's PDent stem is machined from just about every direction to reduce its weight. The window in the center marks where the handlebar and steerer would normally overlap.Riding PDentKirk Pacenti says that the ultimate stem length for a trailbike designed to maximize technical riding is between 10 and 30 millimeters - with the caveat that the top tube length be adjusted to compensate for proper reach. His take is that because it is difficult to make stems shorter than what we presently have, that the industry at large has yet to experiment with geometry that incorporates stems in that range (
Mondraker being the exception here).
To test his theories, I bolted the PDent combination to a Commencal Meta V4, which is slightly large for me and thus, has a top tube length long enough to make up for most of the 25mm (one inch) difference created by substituting the 50-millimeter stem I had been using. I also cut the handlebar from 800 millimeters to a more useable 770 - a bit wider than the 760-millimeter bar that I prefer, but experience shows that a shorter stem usually requires a wider bar to compensate for the faster steering response generated by the stem's reduced moment arm.
Alrighty then. As one may expect, the first sensations I experienced were that I was much more in contact with what the front tire was doing, and that the steering was way quicker than I was comfortable with. After an hour of playing around with small jumps and boulder drops, however, the Commencal's forgiving handling returned and I was able to enjoy the changes that PDent brought to my once-familiar trailbike.
Climbing was somewhat plagued by a wiggly front end that never quieted - a situation that continued after I had arrived at the point where I was no longer conscious of the other changes that PDent had made to the Commencal's handling. As I have become handy at figuring out how to be comfortable on a wide variety of bikes, I'll call the wiggly climbing out as a negative handling trait that some could overlook in light of the benefits that the system provides to other aspects of the bike's handling.
It would be easy to assume, because direct mount fork crowns allow DH bikes to be regularly ridden with stem-lengths in the 25-millimeter range, that a trailbike would perform similarly, but such is not the case. The trailbike's steeper head angle, combined with its shorter fork length, places the front tire nearly two inches closer to the rider, so there is a significant forward weight shift that the trailbike rider must compensate for in all aspects of its performance envelope. That is especially so on the downs, where the rider can put much more pressure on the front tire and is looking well ahead of the bike.
But, there is a plus side to that lean-forward stance. The front tire tends to stick like glue to the trail surface, and it doesn't push much, even if you forget to properly bank the bike into the bends. Better still, once you get over the face-forward attack position that PDent encourages on the steeps, you'll discover that the bike can be steered with a remarkable sense of security while descending chutes that most riders skid their way down, using hope as a line choice.
I found that I could brake with the front tire much harder and later too. The greatest paradox of the PDent's shorty stem and lean-forward stance, however, is that it becomes easier to loft the front end on the downs while you are hovering closer to the handlebar and putting more weight on the front wheel. Of course, that is usually the case - anytime I actually
do get forward enough on my bike and attack a steep descent.
The magic of PDent is that it curtails the option to get too far back over the saddle and screw it up. I'd swear that the bike was handling the downs better, but the truth was that PDent was forcing me to adopt a better riding position. Once I was shamed by that fact that I was using the "eject" and not the "attack" position, I began to ride equally as well with my 50-millimeter stem bikes. Of course, most trail bikes are designed around 50 millimeter stems, which underscores Kirk Pacenti's statement that PDent was developed to allow bike makers to progress to the next level of chassis design - one based upon super-short stems, of course. Until that time, PDent will be a godsend to those who have been wishing for sub-30 millimeter stems and a nudge for designers to consider different paths towards making the ultimate trail bike.
Pinkbike's Take: | PDent is going to be popular with riders at the more extreme end of the all-mountain category who live for the downs and yet, possess the fitness to smile at passersby as they muscle their thousand gram tires, Fox 36 fork, and 160-millimeter-travel chassis uphill for two hours to access the tastiest morsels on the mountain. PDent could also gain popularity among mainstream trail riders, but not until bike makers incorporate their frame metrics to blend seamlessly with the different steering attributes of sub 30-millimeter stems. Simply buying up to the next frame size in order to match a longer top tube with a shorter stem is not enough. After riding PDent, I believe that splitting the difference, by choosing a bike with a one-degree slacker head tube angle, paired with a ten to fifteen millimeter longer top tube, would deliver a better PDent handling package in all theaters of the trail riding experience. PDent gives riders and bike makers a new option. - RC |
The design really is about as dumb as increasing a wheel and tyre diameter by not even 20mm and claiming it as revolutionary, then giving it a bs misleading name to make it sound like halfway between two other wheel sizes... I think Trek should employ this pacenti guy, they seem to have the same ethic that insignificant improvements must be forced on the industry with entirely new standards for everything every ten minutes
Are you sure of that ?
Are you sure about what you're saying there PB?
The crown offset and axle toe in then effect where the wheel sits relative to the steerer at the other end of the fork.
What can make for a different feel is the difference in these offsets. This stem will feel different with different forks.
Then add in the effects of head angle, bar sweep and position and things are never simple.
.... bottom line... ride whatever you feel comfortable with and works for you.
But if you isolate the stem, and we're only talking about stem, the longer the more weight on the front end.
I think we need to take into account that Richard took a bike that is too long for him so he was unable to get that correct position, which has been solved by the shorter stem, hence more weight on the front wheel.
If he had a bike that suited him well in the first place, the effect of the shorter stem would have been what we know.
I think this is key to understant his statement, and it would have been great if he'd explained it better.
Side note- 35mm length stems have existed for a while and bike companies have continued sticking to building around a 50mm stem. So why would they all of sudden want to design around a 15mm or 25mm stem?
RC
Are you saying I have an excuse, on my WTB Vigilante CCDB Fox36RC2 SB66, as to why I really do not like climbing? My current beefcake build weighs 34.2# and something I XC around the front range often.
You don't have to buy it if you don't need it. I certainly won't. But it's valid.
I remember 100mm stems the norm, 25.4 clamp and 620mm bars. I certainly wouldn't go back! Could I ride a bike hard with such "passé" set up? Absolutely. But why?
Coul
Fabien Barel told me (and experiments back it up) that once you get the stem too short, and your grips get behind the steering axis, that the steering feels destabilized. He says 10 to 15mm stems are as far as he could take the concept during testing at Mondraker.
I'm sure the effect Barel mention of bars being too far back can be achieved with existing bars and a 32mm stem?
Joking aside, I dig the out of the box ingenuity! This kind of thinking gave us mountain bikes in the first place.
fcdn.mtbr.com/attachments/downhill-freeride/147768d1142215475-whats-shortest-stem-there-stem.jpg
> shorter stems are presently available that place the handlebar above the steerer tube, but at the expense of a ridiculously tall handlebar height
I am somewhat an early adopter of this "trend" as some would call it, and I like it. My large GG Megatrail has a reach that is nearly an inch longer than many XL frames, I currently ride with a 40mm stem and 800mm bars and it feels amazing going up and down. I would not mind giving this system a try, but its not like i'm going to throw out my Renthal/Enve stem and bars as soon as these are available.
Also frame weights...people want their frames to be light. A short stem doesn't save much weight at all, but a equally longer top tube adds more to the frame weight. So maybe that's in the balance, too, for why a frame designer might just stick with the longer stem. Easier to source parts and the frame is a bit lighter.
All this being said, Pacenti is still the small guy so we're not going to see instant sweeping change, even if it's better. It's going to have to be a lot better for major manufacturers to start licensing the idea to produce their own.
This got me thinking though...is there any reason (handling, bike fit, whatever) why a size Large bike would come with a longer stem than a Small size, except that they didn't actually make the frame long enough to properly fit a taller rider?
At the same time you ask yourself,;
Why I didn't think of that!
(But being also a motorcyclist, I am wondering when we will see negative stem lengths... would be interesting to have a ride!)
• Stem: CNC-machined aluminum, black anodize, four-bolt clamp, 15 or 25mm extensions
• Steerer diameter: 1, 1/8"
• Clamp diameter: 31.8mm
• Handlebar: Carbon, 31.8mm clamp area, 8-degree sweep/5-degree up, 15mm rise, 180mm width
????? 180mm width ?????
Richard Cunningham, are you sure?
Oh, and I disagree that we need shorter stems. We haven't settled around 50mm for no reason - with a standard handlebar, you'd be able to go to ~30mm without any interference, yet nobody does. Guess why.
Also I come from a bmx background, I never wanted to go with the steepest head angle or the shortest stem.
Question though....
We are always talking about sharpness of steering, I am not sure I like that, I know this more so relegates to head angle as well, but if we are wanting sharpness then why not make the headtubes more steep again?
It's weird how people are always claiming there bikes climb like a goat, though I am seeing so many differences in geometry on said bikes.
Also... Do none of you have tree's around where you live? I am 6' 6 and I run a 730mm bar... 800 was to wide for our trail system.
Bmx has seen the same trend pattern though, before people cut down there bars and a typical rise was about 7" nowdays you have bars with a 10" rise and 30" wide, and kids who were sub 5' tall running the newer tall bars and claiming the same type of control influence that I was having...
google: onoff stoic stem