This website uses Cookies. Click Accept to agree to our website's cookie use as described in our Privacy Policy. Click Preferences to customize your cookie settings.
I own a gravel ebike with a motor speed limit at 25km/h. If I‘m riding above this limit, all the power comes from my legs and none from the motor. Please add a cathegory „e-bike 25km/h“ to mark the ride correctly.
We appreciate your participation in the Community. It’s not entirely clear from your post what you’re suggesting here. Do you mind elaborating and including more details on the topic? Based on your description, you could just mark the activity as "Ebike". Why would the additional "25km/h" be necessary?
We kindly ask that you review our Ideas guidelines, particularly the “What makes a good idea” section, to ensure that your ideas are clear, concise, and can reach as many others as possible.
There are 2 types of ebikes. There are the ones, where the power support ends at 45km/h and there are others, where the power support ends at 25km/h.
When I'm riding a 45km/h bike, then I will take the activity "e-bike" in Strava, because the most of the time I will get the support from the motor during my ride. Therefore, it's clear, that all my stats, segments, ... refer to ebike in a separate activity group.
Now, to my "problem":
When I'm riding a 25km/h bike, such as my Gravel e-bike, I get the support from the motor only until 25km/h. So when I'm riding with 30km/h I get no support from my motor anymore. In this case, I'm riding it like a normal bike and could join the normal segments and stats. But I cannot ride this bike as a normal bike, because, when the route goes uphill, then I get the support from the motor - in this case the activity "e-bike" makes sense.
My Idea was, to make a new activity like "ebike 25km/h" which acts as the activitiy "ebike" but only when the speed is below 25. When the speed is above 25 it should act as "normal bike"
First of all, there are a lot more than just two types of e-bikes. There are a bunch of different levels of e-bikes and the amount of assistance they provide and to what speed they provide it varies greatly. Picking one specific speed for a category would be very arbitrary.
I am confused about how you are suggesting to separate this from other rides. You mention making a category for 25 km/h e-bikes, but then talking about it being treated as a "normal bike" at certain speeds. Every ride will have times when the rider is below 25km/h and receiving assistance from the motor. Do you want to have segments you ride below 25km/h on compared as an e-bike but then if you happen to ride a segment at more than 25km/h, it would compete on the "normal bike" leaderboard?
Even though the 25 km/h throttle is the usual limit in most european countries I don't think it's worth the hassle to make it a separate sports type. The few people who drive an ebike with higher limits like 45 km/h are of course mostly on top ranks in flat ebike segments but is this really a problem for anyone? And if someone tunes their bike they probably won't admit it by tagging their bike in Strava accordingly. Different segment applications (normal ride segments and ebike ride segments) for the same activity depended on speed won't work anyway what with segments where the speed is sometimes above and sometimes below and there is this thing that even 25 km/h is only the regulated value but every bike differs from it even without tuning.
Thanks for posting about this. Just to confirm - when you say Nm you mean newton-metres of torque, correct? We don't have a way to distinguish that on Strava. You can however adjust the weight your bike on your Gear page:
Hi Jane! Thx for the response! Yes I meant Newton Meters 🙂 But setting the weight lighter for the bike doesn't really change the fact, that you have more support on climbs with a stronger motor. It's more likely the opposite of what should be done. Per ex. a Bosh CX bike with 85Nm with 25kg (+rider weight per ex 75kg=100kg in total) does not have the same power relations as per example a TQ HRP-50 bike with 50Nm around 18kg (+rider weight per ex 75kg=93kg in total). If you know wht I mean 🙂
Just to clarify what you are suggesting - is your idea that we split our current e-bike activity into two different activity types? Athletes could choose "light" for e-bikes that provide more assistance and "heavy" for e-bikes with less assistance?
Hey Jane If ebikers would only have to specify the weight and power support of their bike and this could be somehow be taken in account in the listing, then that would probably only affect the calories and the average performance in watts in the end. So maybe yes, it could make sense to have a separate category for light ebikes per ex from 50 to 60Nm and everything above is a regular ebike... But that's probably a nut to ckrack for your engineers 😉
This is becoming big issue. My bike provides up to 240 watts assist, but I see riders taking course KOM on a 850 watt assist and recently a 2,500 watt assist bike ( really a motorbike). As a minimum I think there should be a category for 250 watts or less as baseline as this is EU law for a road ebike, anything over should be off-road or in a diiferent higher category
I agree wholeheartedly. I have a Whyte Gosford with the Fazua Evation system. This provides a max torque of 55nm. I live in West Wales surrounded by hills. I can never get into the segment leaderboards as they are populated by people with e-bikes of a much higher power.
I would suggest three categories. Light assist, mid assist and high assist.
E-Bike segments are just for fun, with the exception for technical segments there is no way they will ever be fair for everyone with the whole load of different motor powers and speed limiters. Having two groups or ten wouldn't change it. I would say we live with it how it is and don't add unnecessary complications.
I think it's too much to create separate leader boards for different types of bikes, we could end up with 5 seperate boards. but if the bike type and assist level used for the segment was visible on the riders ride then that would be a good compromise.
