maybe post in the thread Jim (Jim@Erosports) posted today talking about bottle setups. Maybe he'll test something similar.

Or... use Goldencheetah and test the differences yourself.

---

My Blog - http://leegoocrap.blogspot.com

I'd say your biggest issue is the bike computer way up in the air like that. You're better off mounting it flush with something or in-line with the bottle, between your hands or wrists.



You can see how wrists hide it in a race.



Obligatory dog photo to show how seriously we take aero in our family. So you know I'm an expert.

---

----------------------------------------------------------
Zen and the Art of Triathlon. Strava Workout Log
Interviews with Chris McCormack, Helle Frederikson, Angela Naeth, and many more.
http://www.zentriathlon.com

Wasn't there a study that showed it was aero if it was installed a bit different than intended? I thought I remember something along those lines last year some time.

This was shown on the ERO Sports blog write up Jim did where he tested it for an athlete. Flipping the mount to lower the bottle proved more aero for the set up tested.

Well if you compare your setup with a true bta setup you will that you have really increased the frontal area because "bottle" hangs down in the wind whereas a typical bta bottle is surrounded by the forearms and doesn't really increase frontal area. One of the design goals of the Canyon was to elliminate the the frontal area associated with the stem. Your setup basically adds the frontal area back into the system.

You have the point here. After all your comments, i am leaning to the bta. I have a xlab torpedo compact and it should be just fine :)

On these stem-less "super bikes" one of the areas to look for aero improvements is the area just below the elbow pads and between the pedastals/risers. You want the air to be able to flow through this area and out between the legs. Like all aero "rules of thumb" your results may vary, but I did try to test aero bar modifications in this area that smoothed the flow in this region. For me any increase in frontal area offset any smoothing of the region.

Yes and no. Both the Torhans Aero 20 & 30, and the FC35 shown here have both been shown to lower frag more than any other front hydration systems specifically because they hang low. However, those results come from the fact that they sit directly in front of the head tube increasing the depth (when the set up allows). In this case, I would suspect this set up increases drag, but that FC35 can be surprising, so I'll add a similar configuration to our up-coming tests.

---

Jim Manton / ERO Sports

Unless you've already tried it and found otherwise, I wouldn't factor the ability to store gels into the equation. I have an FC25 (same at the top, it just doesn't drop as low) and I've found the "storage" compartment utterly useless. I like the FC25 in use, I just don't like it for cleaning etc.

How big of a gap between the bottle and the head tube is too big for the benefit to go away? I recently bought an FC35 but found that my aerobars are too narrow to do the mount upside down like you guys recommended. I ended up removing the velcro mount pieces and zip tie'ing the bottle mount to the bars. I was able to get the bottle pretty low in the bars, but there is still a 2-3" gap back to the head tube.

After reading about (and experiencing) the provlems with the gel compartment, i just added a thick elastic band (initially several thick rubber bands, later a cut off piece fron a wetsuit forearm) which held the gels in nicely. YMMV.