As far as I remember an interview of Canyon's engineer, Wolfgang Kohl, he said that the BTA solution from the previous model had following downsides: 1) increase of the exposure to side winds (bigger surface) - the current solution in the frame reduces the side exposure to crosswinds - 2) center of gravity of the bike is higher with a BTA - a disadvantage for the handling of the bike.

Interesting topic, I was almost ready to buy this bike and waiting for it since a long time. I used a Camebak backpack with such kind of bladder in the past, and it was a PITA to clean. Plus I am not completely convinced of how convenient/easy it is to replace the bladder in the frame after removing it. Plus the increased price. Now I am hesitating a lot. Not interested in the CF for various reasons.

There's nothing to clean if you fill it with water and concentrate your preferred carbs in the gel bottle, as intended. If you want carbs from course, theres also the BTS.

[.]
750ml is plenty water to make it to the next aid station, there are other places on the bike to put carbs, and there's always the option to add BTA if you want to go 300km without an aid station.

Come on, If I get a bike at this price setting I don't want to be limited to just plain water to use my hydrationsystem.

Jeroen.

Installation is not the same as cleaning :-) I'm curious how they managed to avoid the patent of Specialized on this. Can't imgane Spec would sold them a license for it.

Jeroen

Installation is not the same as cleaning :-) I'm curious how they managed to avoid the patent of Specialized on this. Can't imgane Spec would sold them a license for it.

Jeroen

I know there's already a thread on the new Canyon Speedmax Disc but I wanted to direct the conversation to a specific topic: Between the Aerobars hydration, and specifically its absence, on the newly announced tri bike.

Until now, BTA (between the aerobars) hydration systems were sold as something that not only improved hydration but also carried real wattage gains and are something that top of the range triathlon bikes have had for years, whether they came with the bike or were added with retrofitting of aftermarket products.

Triathlon bikes sold with integrated BTA systems include the previous Canyon Speedmax, Scott Plasma, Giant Trinity Advanced, and more.
Even the new Scott Plasma 6 has kept an integrated BTA solution despite also having a "fuel cell".

Now, Canyon has decided to go a different way.

The new Canyon Speedmax Disc claims a 9W improvement over the Speedmax CF SLX. While the Speedmax CF SLX (rim brakes) has an integrated BTA solution, the new Disc versions (CFR and CF SLX variation) cannot support a BTA solution at all and only allows the use of the integrated "fuel cell".

I'm curious then why is that so? Why did Canyon decide to create something that cannot use such a common solution?
Were the speed gains not that big after all?

I'm looking to hear people's thoughts on the above.