I don’t really understand what the problem is. You ride with ebikes and you feel excluded because Strava has marked your activities as ebike rides? In that case Strava didn’t exclude you but pointed out correctly that you used the wrong activity type for a long time, thus deceiving yourself and others. You have to change such activities to ebike rides and then you will see segments again. And if not, because ebikes have their own set of segments, you can create them.
Or is this about former road bike rides that Strava has wrongly flagged?
Thanks for the reply, Jan — I appreciate the question.
For me, the issue isn’t about whether a ride is or isn’t an e-bike ride — it’s about why we need to treat them so differently. A ride is a ride. Strava already has categories for age, gender, and even weight, so why not apply the same idea to bike type rather than separating them completely?
Right now, when a ride gets marked as “e-bike,” it’s essentially moved into a different universe — no longer part of the same local segments, leaderboards, or “local legend” stats. I love seeing how many people ride the same routes as me and how often — but when my rides are segregated like that, it takes away a big part of the community aspect and even messes up the overall counting systems too.
I completely understand that some road riders worried about KOMs being taken by e-bikes — but a legal e-bike tops out at 25–26 km/h (15 mph). There’s no way I’m taking a KOM from someone doing 50 km/h up a hill on a 5 kg carbon road bike! I don’t want to. I just want my rides to count the same way others do, and for Strava to use sub-categories (like e-bike, road, MTB, etc.) rather than exclusion.
Cycling should unite everyone who rides — not divide them by how they ride.
Just record your riding activity as e-bike (which is available). Then that’s all good.
You can complete with other e-bike rider.
Mixing e-MTB, e-Road and other bikes activity together. IMHO, is just wrong.
Thanks, Ray — I get where you’re coming from, but that’s exactly the issue. It’s not about wanting to compete against road bikes or mountain bikes — it’s about being part of the same community.
When my ride is marked as e-bike, it’s removed from all the normal segments, stats, and rider lists. Even if I ride the exact same route as others, I don’t show up among them — it’s as if I never rode that road at all. That’s what feels wrong.
When I started, I was riding at over 200 kg combined (bike and rider). I was just out there submitting rides, trying to be part of something, and every kilometer counted. Now, because of AI, those rides don’t count in the same world they used to — and that’s not hard to understand why it feels unfair.
What makes it more confusing is that the system already allows for different classes of age, weight, and gender — so why not bike type too? Instead, e-bike rides are completely segregated, which breaks the sense of community and even skews the overall ride counts.
I’m not asking to take KOMs or compete unfairly. A legal e-bike can’t match a road bike’s speed anyway. But I am asking for inclusion. Why should a motor-assisted rider be treated so differently when there are already huge variations in bike types, fitness levels, and equipment? A 5 kg carbon road bike is a technical advantage too — yet those rides aren’t excluded.
It’s not about cheating; it’s about enabling more people to ride. Once people try an e-bike, they usually realise it’s not easier — it’s just possible again.
If your usual ebike routes are like mine around Hampshire UK, you may well find that there are very few ebike segments, compared to ~15 years of road bike segments.
If so, simply create some sensiible, public ebike segments. Either from your actual ebike rides, or temporarily switching an old road bike ride to an ebike ride to create the ebike segment and then switching back to being a road bike ride, on the Strava desktop website.
Some segments, once populated with historical public ebike data, will feel poorly populated.
Some may be littered with incorrectly labelled vehicle recordings that can be flagged, as well as some ebike rides that are technically electric motorbikes as far as your local law is concerned (eg. getting more than ~15.5mph motor assistance up a 4% gradient to average approx 20mph for 5+ minutes in the UK and some other countries).
But there will likely be some legitimate, legal ebike segment data and once other local riders become aware of the segments, they are more likely to ride out to include them.
Strava’s obsession with elite competition is making it forget the people who actually make it a community.
When Strava made the separation, it didn’t just tidy up leaderboards; it walled off an entire group of legitimate riders into what’s essentially a ghost town.
You’re right:
“E-bike riders are the few — none of the segments exist there. When you move, you lose any relation to any other riders.”
That’s 100% true.
when Strava removes the social and comparative context, what’s left?
It becomes a glorified data log — a spreadsheet with a GPS trace. There’s no sense of belonging, no shared progress, no reason to feel proud of effort within a community. That’s the real loss — not KOMs, not rankings, but meaning.
The irony is that Strava’s current system punishes honesty. If you mark your ride correctly as an E-Bike ride, you lose everything. If you leave it as a normal ride, you risk being accused of cheating.
It’s a no-win situation. And it drives exactly the people Strava should be celebrating — regular riders, returning athletes, people improving their health — away.
It’s not about chasing KOMs, it’s about being seen for the work we’ve put in. Strava’s obsession with protecting a narrow “purist” definition of performance has blinded it to that.
The truth is, Strava doesn’t need to divide us. It could unite us again by offering shared segments with smart filters, or comparative metrics based on effort, bodyweight, or assistance level. Let people choose how they want to view rides — “All,” “Unassisted,” “E-Bike,” whatever fits.
Right now, being honest means being excluded.
My 2c - you’re not excluded, you're simply a different sport type athlete.
In-line skaters or cross-country skiers do pretty much the same kind of movement as runners, right? But you bet that the moment I’d see any such activity marked as “run”, I’ll flag it right away. It's not excluding anyone, it's simply making them use the correct category instead of littering runners leaderboards.
I have a friend who's a wheelchair marathoner. He wouldn't think even for a second to mark his marathon as a “run” though in the name of inclusion - he has his own category. His ~2hrs marathon time would be simply unfair to regular runners.
Being fair in sports is what it's all about. It's not about rejecting inclusion. You do have your sport type at Strava, unlike others (like e.g. kickbike), you're not excluded. If you want to feel more “belonging", you can e.g. contribute to the community by creating public segments, as others already advised.
I understand the point about fairness, but this isn’t about competing on KOMs — it’s about connection.
E-bikes aren’t a different sport the way running and wheelchair racing are. They’re still cycling — same motion, same effort, same community.
I want to see the people I ride with — they don’t all have e-bikes. I want to see the commuters who share my routes — they don’t all have e-bikes either. But once we get moved over into the land where there are no segments, no riders, and your answer is “create your own,” it’s clear you just don’t get it.
This isn’t inclusion — it’s quiet exclusion. I’m not asking to appear on pure leaderboards; I’m asking for shared segments with filters or effort-based views so all cyclists can stay connected.
Fairness shouldn’t mean isolation. It should mean belonging with context.
Competition should be fair. If you compete on a ebike when half of the job is done by electric engine, with other bikers where all of the job is done with muscles, I don’t see why it shouldn’t be not enforced to compete with other ebike riders, not all ‘bike riders’ Am I missing the point?
You’re absolutely right — competition should be fair. I’m not asking to keep KOMs or mix assisted rides with unassisted ones. If I’m on an e-bike, I know I’m getting help — well, some of the time.
What I’m asking for is not to be excluded from the community entirely. Segments aren’t only about top speed — things like Local Legend and shared routes are about participation and connection. I ride with people who don’t all have e-bikes, and I still want to see the same segments and community data they do.
The truth is, Strava could fix this easily — shared segments with classified ride types are simple to implement. They’re just need to do it properly.
You’re aware that getting a Local Legend is also a reward for effort in a particular sport - and that you’d be taking it from someone who had put in *more* effort than you, because they’ve used solely their own power, right?
I understand the need to be included, though you might want to look for different ways to achieve that rather than insisting that e-bike should be treated the same as a regular bike.
We’re having clubs for example, with people of different abilities.
But if it comes to effort comparing and anything related, you'll need to keep the fairness in mind.
For example the “grouping” feature that Strava has and that shows with whom you did an activity - for example, I’ve many times ran the same race as some “celebrity” runners, pros with some otherworldly pace. It feels cool to start with them for sure. But did I run “with them”? Hell no, I’d see them in the distance soon and by the time I got across the finish line, they're gone home probably. I’m simply much slower. And Strava won't group me with those super fast pros, instead it will group me with people of similar pace. And that's totally okay. I know that if I want to be marked as “ran with [Joe the fastest runner in town], I have to get faster. It's just fair and it doesn't make me excluded.
If it comes to routes, there are already feature requests for more flexible planning in terms of various sports types, for example this:
So it might be worth voting for this kind of ideas. or submitting similar ones, that do support inclusion but without breaking the fair play.
I just joined this forum this week to have a sensible debate. I’m open to reasonable argument and candour, but the vast weight of bias here is crushing.
I now see that many people before me raised the same points in the “Why We Love E-Bikes on Strava” thread — and their arguments were quietly closed off too. That’s probably why none of them have joined this post.
I’m not asking to win medals or keep KOMs. I completely agree that assisted and unassisted rides shouldn’t compete on the same leaderboard. If I’m on an e-bike, I know I’m getting help — well, some of the time.
What I’ve said all along is that segregation isn’t fairness. I want to see the same routes, segments, and local activity as the people I actually ride alongside. Local Legend, for example, is about commitment, not speed. I earned one today entirely on my own effort — but even if it were assisted, it still reflects real participation on the same roads as everyone else.
What’s disheartening is that every time someone raises this issue, the same voices appear, instantly liked by the same accounts, repeating the same line about fairness while ignoring the real point — connection. That isn’t discussion; it’s dismissal.
Strava could fix this easily with shared segments that classify ride types separately. Instead, those of us asking for inclusion are told to “create our own segments” — a polite way of saying go ride somewhere else.
I’m not here to take anyone’s medals. I just want an app that lets me track my daily rides against the people who actually share the same paths. If Strava isn’t that platform, then fine — I’ll take my rides, my data, and my subscription money, somewhere that understands what community really means.
Well @istokes, you've joined this community forum this week and you already feel confident enough to lecture others what community means? Good for you.
You’ve highlighted the fact that it's often the same people answering here. Thanks for noticing - we are regular Strava users like yourself, and we visit this forum regularly to help others understand how Strava works, how to submit ideas, and the like. Building the community, you know - and you can too jump in and contribute. That's just another opportunity how to take part and how to belong. You're more than welcome, it will cost you nothing but your time.
You keep rejecting all suggestions, you keep intentionally twisting what people respond - that's not discussion, that's manipulation. (When someone tells you to create segments - that definitely doesn't mean that you should ride elsewhere. That means: ride the very same route and compete with others fairly.)
Inclusion is a great thing, using inclusion as an excuse for manipulation is not.
@istokes Segments were invented for comparisons, not for connecting. So you redefining what segments are for will not earn you much consent.
If you are in a group ride with normal bikes I suggest you create an idea here in the hub that you will be shown with them afterwards. Nobody would have anything against that. But your repeated accusations against Strava because they segregate sports (the most normal thing in my opinion) of course leads to counter arguments.
(On a side note - in a discussion, I appreciate when people actually take the effort to discuss, instead of just copy&pasting what an AI chatbot had generated. That indicates at least some basic level of respect for other participants.)
I came here in good faith, not to lecture or manipulate anyone, but to have an honest discussion about how Strava could better support all cyclists.
I’ve listened to the replies and I understand that you both see this purely as a matter of competition. My view is different: I use Strava for connection and personal tracking, not for trophies.
The way I’ve been spoken to in this thread actually proves my point about the culture shift — reasonable feedback is met with defensiveness instead of dialogue. That’s disappointing, but not unexpected.
I’ll leave this conversation here, at least knowing my voice isn’t a lone one. There are many others in the “Why We Love E-Bikes on Strava” discussion who raised the same points and were silenced in exactly the same way.
Readers can decide for themselves which side sounds more open to inclusion and genuine community.
