When Shimano’s patent for a sprung loaded clipless mechanism expired, the DMR V-Twin jumped on the design to create DMR's first ever clipless pedal.
Like the old Shimano DX pedal, the DMR V-Twin is a caged clip- in design with a floating mechanism and bindings on both sides. In its neutral position the binding sits up at an angle ready for the cleat, but once engaged it rotates forward to a level position. Clipping in and out is just as easy as the DX and the cleats are even cross compatible.
Like all clip-in pedals, the mechanism has adjustable release tension, but the DMR V-Twin is indexed so you can easily balance the four sides to suit. Not that we played around with it because the stock setting provided just the right amount of hold.
In the past we’ve had issues with the V-Twin’s durability with play in the axle and the spring mechanism starting to feel sluggish. Thankfully the latter can be sorted by re-greasing the mechanism and the former can be fixed with the £10 rebuild kit, although you will need the V-Twin fitting tool to do this, which is £25.
Compared to rival Nukeproof and HT pedals, we could literally glide into the bindings with very little fumbling or pressure. There’s also a decent amount of rotation and float, which is partly because there’s very little shoe in contact with the platform due to the raised mechanism. Thankfully DMR offers extra shims which you can place under the black plastic bumpers on the front and rear edges to raise them up, and we did add a couple of shims to increase support.
We also replaced the six stock grub screws with the deeper pins, but actually went back to standard after one ride because they proved too tall.
The V-Twin is a little bit heavy, because that floating mechanism adds weight, but it’s one of the easiest pedals to get in and out of and can be really dialled into the shoe tread using the shims provided. Our main criticism is the high cost, especially since you can still buy the Shimano DX M647 pedals for £75. The V-Twin is available in two cool colours, but that’s not enough to justify the £55 price difference.