Zwift’s newest update includes a new bike frame: the Addict RC from Scott.
Scott already had a handful of frames in game: the Plasma (TT), the Foil (aero racer), and the Spark RC (MTB). The Addict RC adds a mature all-around road racer to the mix, as the Addict RC is lightweight while maintaining strong aero performance.
Here’s how the new Addict RC is described in the Zwift Drop Shop:
“Since its introduction in 2008, the Addict RC has been one of the most successful competitive road bikes on the market. The new Addict RC is as complete as it can get when it comes to the perfect high-performance road bike. Regardless of whether you’re trying to win the biggest races on the planet, chasing a virtual segment, or taking on your riding buddies on your local climb, the Addict RC makes it more likely that you will come out on top.”
The frame is rated 3 stars for aero and 4 for weight on Zwift, indicating that it will be a strong all-arounder. You’ll have to be level 33+ to purchase it in game, at a price of 852,000 Drops.
Over the years, the Addict RC has certainly been used to win plenty of big pro races, including Simon Yates Vuelta a Espana victory in 2018. But IRL performance doesn’t always map directly to Zwift performance, so we ran this frame through our standard tests to learn how it performs in Zwift. And the results were noteworthy!
Here’s everything you need to know about the new Scott Addict RC in Zwift.
Aero Performance
The Addict RC turns in a flat test time just 1 second slower than the new best all-arounder (Pinarello Dogma F) which was released last month, placing it in the 81st percentile in terms of aero performance.
The Addict RC’s flat test time is 51:22.5. By comparison, the fastest frame in game (Cervelo S5 2020) turns in a time of 51:11. (Our test course is two laps of Tempus Fugit, which totals 34.6km.)
Climb Performance
When the road tilts upward, the Scott Addict RC really shines. It turns in an Alpe du Zwift climb time 4 seconds faster than the Pinarello Dogma F, placing it in the 97th percentile for climbing frames in game. It is only bested on the Alpe by the Specialized Aethos!
The Addict RC climbs Alpe du Zwift in a time of 48:55. By comparison, the standard Zwift aero frame turns in a time of 49:31, and the Specialized Aethos completes the test is 48:49.
Note: all test results above are from a 75kg, 183cm rider holding 300W steady using Zwift’s stock 32mm carbon wheelset.
Top All-Arounder
The Pinarello Dogma F was announced as the new top all-arounder when it was released in Zwift last month. But since the Scott Addict RC loses 1 second to the Dogma F on the flats while gaining 4 seconds on the climbs, we’re going to say the Addict RC is the new top all-arounder in game, because it delivers incredible performance where it’s needed most in many races (the climbs).
Tron-Killer?
Astute racers will be asking if the Addict RC will finally unseat the Tron bike from its top all-arounder status. Our answer is: yes, but you have to decide where you want to gain an advantage over the Tron, and this will be determined by your wheelset choice.
Example #1: Throw the new DT Swiss disc on and the Addict is 8.5 seconds faster on the flats, but 4 seconds slower on the climbs compared to the Tron.
Example #2: Use the ENVE 7.8 wheelset and the Addict is 6 seconds slower on the flats, but 9 seconds faster on the climbs.
So where do you want your advantage to be? Your wheelset choice with the Addict RC will determine if it outclimbs the Tron, or outpaces it on flat ground. But no wheelset currently in game will let you do both.
Conclusions
The Scott Addict RC is a super-impressive all-arounder, turning in nearly best-in-game climbing performance while maintaining speed on the flats and descents.
It’s almost like have a Specialized Aethos frame without taking the aero performance hit. And because of that, this frame is the smart choice for any Zwift road race that will have decisive climbs. It will give you a huge advantage on the climbs (when effort is highest), and you shouldn’t feel much of a penalty while sitting in on the flats and descents.
Due to this frame’s incredible aero performance we’ll be updating the following posts soon:
- Best Climbing Frames
- Fastest Frames for Flat/Rolling Races
- Tron Bike vs Top Performers (Scatter Plot)
- Fastest Climbing Frames and Wheels at Each Level
- Fastest Frame and Wheelset for Climbing Alpe du Zwift
Additionally, whenever a new frame is added to the Drop Shop we add it to our Master Zwift Frames List and update the following:
Questions or Comments?
Share below!
Important note: this post contains speed test results for Zwift frames or wheels. These results may change over time, and a bike’s performance relative to others may also change. We don’t always revise posts when performance rankings change, but we do keep current, master versions of our speed test results which are always available. See the frame charts, wheel charts, and Tron vs Top Performers for current performance data.
Interested to understand what the difference between “Rolling Hills” and “All rounder” is – At what height do you distinguish between them?
Here’s my view: figure how much “crunch time” in the race is on flats, versus on steep climbs (8%), with gradual climbs (4%) counting 50-50. So on the Bologna time trial, that’s 50% flat, 50% climbs. Then take a weighted average. So if it’s 50-50, seconds saved on flats and climbs count equally. If it’s 25-75 (mostly flat), then time saved on the flats counts 3x as much (e.g. 1 second faster on flats trades off 3 seconds saved on climbs). Etc. Typically “rolling” courses have more flats than climbs. But the key is where the hard efforts will be,… Read more »
It’s strange that it’s only one second slower than the Dogma F, given the later did Tempus Fugit x2 in 51:20 (3080 s), so 51:22.5 (3082.5) would rather be 2.5 seconds slower, not 1. Also, I’m a bit at a loss here with the half-seconds that recently appeared in tests. How do you measure those ? May we get timings but with half seconds for all the gears some day ? Thanks.
Last week, the Dogma F was listed with 3080s (51:20), the Aeroad 2021 with 3081s and the Zwift Carbon with 3095s. Now, there are some little changes for several bikes in the chart.
The Dogma F was listed with 3081,5, the Aeroad 2021 with 3080s and the Carbon with 3096s.
So, the Dogma F had lost 2,5s vs Aeroad 2021 from last week’s frame chart list. I think, that Eric has tested everything new and that’s why we have some notable changes.
Eric averages multiple tests, and so individual tests may have one-second precision from Strava, if he does at least 4 tests, that doubles the effective precision and allows for half-second estimates, recognizing theres is still some uncertainty.
One can improve on Strava’s precision by doing analysis on the FIT files directly, which I’ve done for a race series I once organized. But that’s a big topic.
Yes, I’m in the middle (well, about 3/4 done) with a complete re-test of all wheels and frames, using a new testing protocol to improve precision a bit. For this protocol we essentially run each test at least twice. And if we see on that test that, for example, a lap time keeps bouncing between 3000 seconds and 3001 seconds every other lap, we average to say lap time is 3000.5 seconds. We’re finding many of the tests are coming back 1-2s faster than previously tested, especially up the Alpe. I don’t think Zwift has tweaked the frames or wheelsets… Read more »
The day I bought the Alpinist wheelset and used it to climb the Alpe was the time that I managed to win the Lightweights at the top. It did seem rather ironic, although most probably not enough for Alanis Morissette.
Hi Eric, good to know that you retest all the stuff (and twice) … so what do you think at which date round about we will find the most accurate data ? And which list is then the most up to date one ? … I think, it will be “The Frame & Wheel Ranking Charts” with the red&blue lines, right ? And perhaps the Scatterplot-times vs Tron ? Thanks for all of this !!!!!!!!
Carsten – I’ll do an announcement post when we’re done with the retests and have posted all that updated data. For now, though, you are correct – those two posts have the most correct data.
Basically they show the latest test results, EXCEPT for the climb tests results for frames, which we’re still finishing up (lots of frames, and each one has to do the Alpe twice!)
Ah … perfect, then I will wait until your update announcement for both complete “Ranking Charts” before starting to sort all your data in my personal Excel-table.
One additional question please : Did you also re-test the Tron ? So, can you confirm Tron’s times (3028s/2939s) or has it little changes, too ?
Thanks in advance and many greetings to you.
Just used the rest of my drops on an Athos yesterday. And now I want I had bought this one instead 🙂
Hi Eric, how does the Scott frame perform with the Zipp 858 wheels in comparison with Tron? I’m curious how aero it can get without pairing disc wheels with a road bike (I just can’t do it).
See https://zwiftinsider.com/tron-vs-top-performers/
Is the slight amount of time lost on ADZ climb to Specialized, regained on the decent? Assuming both are using the Alpinist CLX?
Many thanks for the review. To me the Aethos+7.8 still wins over the Addict+7.8 on rolling or slightly hilly courses. The advantage on the climbs seems much more valuable compared to the equally big disadvantage (in terms of numbers) on the flat given the possibility to draft on the flats and the gaps usually being made on climbs.
I am only a few drops away to purchase this crazy Allrounder-frame BUT I’m afraid that ZHQ could slow it down as some other top-performers. So I ask myself, how many days or weeks should I wait to be sure that its performance is fixed ???
If you’re ever bored and need something to do Eric, it would be really interesting to see the Tron bike versus the other “all-arounders” on a course like New York that has lots of short hills, but no real climbing
Eric,
how are the Enve 7.8s quicker on the climb compared to the tron, and compared To the DT Swiss 62s. Logic would say this is the other way around as the Enve wheels are 2* for weight where as the DTs are 4*?
DT 62’s are 3* for weight. ENVE 7.8 are 2*. So DT is lighter.