That’s going to depend on your setup, but in most cases yes it will interfere.
It might not for me as I’m tall (thus I have long arms)
For a lot of people, we’re close to having interference with the Ergo+ or Race+ armrests, which are 125mm long
Closed Scoops are 228mm long and don’t have a scalloped underside, so it would be a very rare case that they could be combined with the ASC extensions.
Just ordered the 43 asc but am currently running the tri rig closed scoops. I know the scoops probably won’t fit with these new extensions. I like the scoops because they make my arms feel more locked in than the stock profile pads. Any recommendations for higher sided pads that fit well with the 43 asc?
If you want to stick with Tririg they have the Mini Closed Back Scoops. Profile Design has released a higher sided arm pads. 51 Speedshop and Revolver are also options.
One of my athletes has those bars with the 51 Speedshop high sided cups, they are a little longer than most normal cups and amazing. I have the cups as well…completely locked in feel. It’s impressive.
The Race+ is the higher, tighter armrest from PD
If you don’t have PD brackets I’ve used the 51s armrests on bars that need m5 bolts
PD does have another option coming on that front, but not for this season (if you’re in the northern hemisphere)
.
Got my wing20c+ and a little disappointed that it didn’t come with any risers. I will need enough risers that a bridge is recommended so I’m trying to compare the A2 and A3C high riser bridges. Which one is easier to hook a cage too? I see that the A2 has a hole in the middle, but is that hole designed for attaching a BTA? Is there a specific mount i would need with either riser to properly attach the BTA?
Any help would be appreciated.
The problem is that including a full riser kit would make it a $1000 bar with a heap of parts that are never used
The aim of splitting out the riser kits is to allow the rider to spend less and to lower wastage. There are more things in the works on that front.
The A3C bridge is not compatible with any BTA mount, it is focussed on UCI legality where BTAs aren’t allowed
A3A bridge was designed for a BTA mount when it was part of the Aeria Ultimate system, but I can’t find the BTA parts on the website so it’s probably not much help to you. Unless you can find a shop or individual that has those parts in a spares bin.
There is a new BTA mount coming that is aimed at ASC extensions (or any extension) on PD bars, I think it’s still a few months away from public availability
is the A3A bta the same parts as what comes with: Profile Design J5 BTA Bridge? If so I have this part already and thus just need the bridge. If not then I will have to wait for your new bta solution which is ok as my next 70.3 is Wisconsin in September.
Yes, the same two piece clamp that locates in that square hole on the bridge
Easy if you already have that
.
Got a pic of this?
The bottle cage bolts hold it together
On a Wing20C+ this bridge will sit above the curved adaptor plate
.
Sorry I wasn’t clear. Do you have a pic of the zip tied garmin solution for the asc bars? I couldn’t figure out how to get that to work.
Garmin mount or BTA mount?
This is the BTA that isn’t released yet and not available for a few more months
Designed to fit close to the front of the bracket where the ASC extensions are still round. Haven’t fitted zip ties as my fit bike doesn’t need a hydration system
Any idea on what might cause a loose aeria bottle . It’s still in there, but more vertical play then when it was new
Not sure this is applicable to your situation… During a recent ride on bumpy roads, the screws for the mounting bracket under the stem started to back out. It started as just a slight vertical wiggle in the bottle and progressed from there. It was probably my fault for not tightening them properly.
Any updates on what and when the ASC Garmin mount is and release date?
Any idea on what might cause a loose aeria bottle . It’s still in there, but more vertical play then when it was new
Two possibilities:
- as the other poster mentioned - check the bolts
- If you have it on full time the plastic mount will start to wear so you’ll get more play in the system. I only put it on for racing but I’ve seen others that ride a lot with it on start to experience more play after a year or two.
When things make it to the market is always harder to pinpoint for me. I think they’ll be arriving at distributors by August and available shortly after that. But it could be a month later.
Being used in the World Tour now for real world testing.
Some video of eurobike mentioned asc pro profile design extensions
When do we get to learn more 
Will we get aero data?
Technically it has been launched as it was on the booth at Eurobike and had its first serious* competition use at a little TT in France over the weekend.
It’s not 3D printed as was stated in the GTN video (that was the only mistake), instead moulded carbon which means it’s lighter, stronger and much cheaper than the rideable 3D prints we did. My 3D printed prototypes weigh nearly twice as much and cost the same to make as the MSRP of the carbon production version. Ti prints would be better on the weight front, but wouldn’t fix the cost problem.
In first run CFD it showed 75s faster at Kona than a clip on and basebar. That translates to 5.7w at 50kph if you want to compare to other claims.
I’ve got the team working on doing some better comparative data.
Still working on getting physical testing, it has been a massive rush getting products to teams and bike brands.
Key points
- only for PD A3 or A2 basebars or bikes that use those platforms (BMC, Canyon, Cube, Orro, Wilier)
- 3 lengths
- 2 brackets to give 4 elbow width positions and 2 reach positions
- 15deg built in angle, range 10-25 with wedges
- Reach extender in the GTN video is a separate product that adds 30mm
- bolt on garmin mount available
There is a rudimentary info page on the EU website https://www.profile-design-eu.com/products/asc-pro (spec table is wrong, looks like it’s from the 43ASC)
The fit range is limited compared to other PD products, there is an unavoidable tradeoff between minimising frontal area and adjustment range.
That is the widest pad position at a bit under 200mm, narrowest ~130mm (yes I know the wheel is not straight)
The design is oriented towards the positions typical of the pointy end of TT and Tri - fairly well forward, tilted, narrow. It is not going to suit every rider, I just want to make that clear at the beginning. PD has other products that can accommodate a far larger range of positions. If you have a bike that it fits on and it can hit your fit numbers it’s an easy path to an optimised front end.
*no one would claim that my uninspiring effort at an aquabike in January was serious competition. And those were the heavy prototypes.
