It's not an XY chart. If an XY chart has real numbers in the X range, they
are proportionally spaced. If an XY chart has any non-numerical values in
the range, the axis reverts to using counting numbers (1, 2, 3) rather than
the values in the range.

Go to the Chart menu Chart Type, and choose an XY type.

- Jon
-------
Jon Peltier, Microsoft Excel MVP
Tutorials and Custom Solutions
http://PeltierTech.com
_______


"Chris Fearon" wrote in message
...
Mike,

Upon further review the scatter chart still had all the mile mark points
equally spaced along the X axis. Example: the spacing interval between
consequetive mile points 3.0 and 3.3 was just the same as the spacing
interval between consequetive mile point 8.0 and 12.5. Clearly that
compresses the scale between consequetive long mile distances and expands
the
scale between the fractional ones. I tried different combinations of
other
charts and could not seem to find a sample that accurately related these
varied mile data points on that X axis. Maybe I missed something.

"Mike Middleton" wrote:

Chris -

Use an XY (Scatter) chart type.

It's the only Excel chart type that positions points according to
numerical
values on both axes.

- Mike
http://www.mikemiddleton.com


"Chris Fearon" wrote in message
...
I have a project involving a hiking trail where I am trying to capture
altitude on Y axis versus mile marker location on X axis. I can enter
the
data in adjoining columns and use the chart wizard but each mile marker
value
gets positioned along the X axis in uniform increments rather than an
actual
linear scale representation. In other words, mile markers 3.3 and the
next
mile marker (3.8) are the same distance apart on the X axis in the
graphic
representation as is marker 3.8 and the next one (12.5). This distorts
the
graphic representation of the actual linear distance between the data
points.
Hopefully I have explained this sufficiently. Any suggestions on how
to
get
a more accurate representation? Thanks!!