.....

- The SC internal storage I could only fit these TPU/Latex tubes. A standard butil one I have a really hard timing fitting it together with the fact that I could potentially damage the tube. The Canyon one looks much "easier", but I have no experience.
....

Have you tried removing the storage holder from the cover, and then just putting whatever you want into a bag and inside the frame? I thought that was what a lot of folks were doing to get around the tiny stock tube/c02 'holder'.

Easy. Speed Concept. The Trek's have been up there with Cervelo in terms of aerodynamics for a long time. I don't think I've seen an aero/wind tunnel comparison to the Canyon, except for Sam Laidlow's velodrome video. In the video, they had to work very hard to get the Canyon as fast as the Trek. What is meaningful, is they had a team of experts to help Sam with his aerodynamics, while the Trek he setup himself for Kona with no testing.

Then you also get the support of your local Trek dealer.

Unless you have unusual body dimensions, you can get it to fit.

Local bike shop should include free fit for the SC as well as stock the proprietary parts to adjust the fit any number of ways. That advantage will continue for the life of the bike as you wish to make adjustments or need small parts.

Hello!


Both are high-end bikes, I don't think you can go wrong with neither of them.

I've moved from a 2013 Cérvelo P5-Six to a Trek SC SLR7 P1 this year. I'm very happy with the bike, performance wise it is very similar honestly, the obvious differences are the disk brakes and the wheels running larger tires (which I'm really enjoying btw).

Thinks to consider that might help you choose:

- Crank arm length, the SC only comes with 172.5mm if I'm not mistaken, check with your LBS, I replaced the Shimano one for a Rotor ALDHU 165mm. Maybe Canyon has more options.

- With Canyon you have the chance to get extended arm pads, for the SC you may need to look for Tririg scoops or other and this may limit the BTA usage. Although they are not cushy the flat bars works as extended arm support for me. (hint: Cee Gees makes outstanding cushy pads even for this SC pad).

- Both wheels are great! However I had the chance to choose between the RSL 51, 65 and 75 without affecting the price (I've chosen the 75 front and rear), so you can probably choose the profile you prefer.

- Race setup, with the Trek BTA you can also add another bottle above the BTA bottle. It is nice although I don't see many people using it (I use it). Heard a pro complaining that on some descends, Nice course, it affected the bike stability.

- Trek frame aero bottle, it is great, it holds +-750ml however just like any other aero bottle they are not thermal. They slide in and out easily, but if you don't like it you can switch for one or two bottle cages of your preference.

- The SC internal storage I could only fit these TPU/Latex tubes. A standard butyl one I have a really hard timing fitting it together with the fact that I could potentially damage the tube. The Canyon one looks much "easier", but I have no experience.

- The SC top tube storage (bento box) is big, you can fit bars, gels etc. and can be removed easily to clean.

- I can't say much about the ISO speed, but it is a very enjoyable bike to ride.

- A friend had issues with a plastic part that holds the straw on his CFR, he that to import it from Germany and the shipping + taxes were way more expensive than the spare part itself.

Easy. Speed Concept. The Trek's have been up there with Cervelo in terms of aerodynamics for a long time. I don't think I've seen an aero/wind tunnel comparison to the Canyon, except for Sam Laidlow's velodrome video. In the video, they had to work very hard to get the Canyon as fast as the Trek. What is meaningful, is they had a team of experts to help Sam with his aerodynamics, while the Trek he setup himself for Kona with no testing.

Then you also get the support of your local Trek dealer.

Unless you have unusual body dimensions, you can get it to fit.

The aero comparison you mention here is BS. At what point in the video do they make that claim? I'd bet my balls the SwissSide designed CFR is faster than the new SC. Did trek ever release any data compared to the rim brake SC?

I can think of reasons to get the Trek but aero isn't one of them.

3:30 into the video Sam says they worked long and found maybe 3 or 4 watts versus his old setup on his old bike. That’s position and bike setup comparisons and does not include helmet changes. However it does include Canyon’s integrated aerobar setup.

[quote applenutt
3:30 into the video Sam says they worked long and found maybe 3 or 4 watts versus his old setup on his old bike. That’s position and bike setup comparisons and does not include helmet changes. However it does include Canyon’s integrated aerobar setup.

[..]
I have a aero coach aero bar set up coming that’s made fir the SC so it will be fitted at the shop so I’ll never deal with the standard bar that a lot complain about

What are the complaints about the stock cockpit setup?

I never installed it but I have all the parts ( I installed the Aerocoach setup on the initial build) and I was curious about swapping just to compare and see.

If your Aerocoach bars have not shipped yet, and if you've never tried them: have a look at the angle of the handles versus the bar. I find they are a bit too parallel for comfort so far from me 0 I have to bend my wrist a bit too much. I do wish the angle of the handles was a bit steeper. They can make it so if you tell them ahead of time - can't be replaced later.
Looking at the recent LS video where he did aero testing, he seems to have the same Ascalon bars but with steeper angles on the handles, which appears more comfortable than stock.

Just thought I would mention it.

What are the complaints about the stock cockpit setup?

{...}
I’m hoping they will be ok as I’ve run just straight aero bars for years , which in theory could be worse on your wrist than the. Aero coach bars
Time will tell I suppose