The scale is dynamic and depending on your screen resolution. If you use your phone having a look at it and turn it in landscape the scale is same width on x and y, portrait it is stretched in y direction…

I think that the Scott Addict RC with DT Swiss Disc is even more OP. It does the flat in 3023, 4 seconds to the good of the TRON, and climbs in 2944, only losing 6 seconds. The Canyon Aeroad with the DT Swiss Discs also holds up quite well compared to the TRON, maybe it’s not the frames that are OP

Was about to say exactly the same thing. This graph is incredibly useful in helping decide which frame/wheel combo to use, and how to get the best advantage with the least compromise, but it does rely on you being able to visualise the relative gain/loss of time and so the scale needs to be the same on both axis in order for the visualisation to be truly representative.

The X and Y should really be scaled equally rather than the tick marks you have of different sizes per mark on each axis.

The TRON does the flat test run in 3027 seconds, the Aethos + DT Swiss Disc does it in 3033 seconds. 6 seconds margin…
The TRON does the climb test in 2938 seconds, the Aethos + DT Swiss Disc does it in 2939 seconds. Barely a margin…

Basically, the Aethos equiped with DT Swiss Disc’s can keep up with the TRON on both the flats and the climbs?! That makes it the most OP frame in the game…

That makes sense and kinda matches what I see. Thanks

Can’t say if it would be better or not. Very rider/course dependant. But generally, I think it’s smart to pick a bike that “helps” you when you need it most. For heavier riders that’s usually climbs.

Sorry, not clear in my question. I meant as a heavier rider would it be better to ride, say, the Aethos than the Venge? That is would the lower combined weight compyfor the loss of aero – bear in mind my average speed for an hour is around 35-36 kph so not gaining a great deal on average from the aero frame?