The test result says they're fastest not Sofride, but its not hard to imagine give the design. Softrides don't have the seat tube (its been integrated with the beam/top tube) Is also does away with seat stays so you got 3 drag elements remove from frame. Bi-Wing planes of WWI will never be as aerodynamic then mono wing planes of WWII. You can refine the Bi-Wings till the wings fall off but they'll never be as efficient aero wise to a mono wing design. This is whats going on with road bikes today, they're stuck with the traditional layout so the only thing they can do is shape tubes to be wings but the amount of exposed frame elements cannot be reduce unlike beam frames designs.

Regarding width, have you ever seen a classic Softride frame? The main wing/beam is only 1/4" wide at the front then buldge to about 3/4-1" wide at the mid section, its basically a wing for down tube. How many tube frame can be that narrow and still be strong?

I'll agreed with you that Sofrides are heavier then the modern counterpart cause they'r aluminum and not carbon wonders of today but imagine if Sofride or Zipp take the beam concept the further develope it for 10 more years.

I got a friend who has a 15lb full carbon Scott SL, one time he accidently slip off his seat and temporary rest on his bikes top tube and it snap! That's a $1,600 mistake right there and you can't fix it, at least no one will touch it. My other friend crash his Cannondale full carbon frame and the narrow curvy seat stay which is design to flex and act like suspension snap in half druing the crash.

If you break the Softride beam...just replace the beam. If you crash soo hard that you actually break the downtube beam of a Sofride in half....then you got bigger things to worry about then the frame. My point is that Softrides are more survivable with a little weight penalty.