Add More Precision to Segment percent grade and distance

This is a simple request Strava used to show the segment's hill gradient to nearest tenth of a percent, but now it is only to the nearest percent. So if a segment's average grade was 4.51% it would be shown as 5% , If another segment had an average grade of 5.49%, the rounding in Strava would show this segment to also be 5%. The problem is that these two climbs would differ in difficulty by about 20% but Strava would show them both at 5%. So if Strava would go back and just display the grade in tenths of a percent instead of the current nearest percent, we could get a better comparison of different climbs that we might be doing. The same recommendation goes for the segment distance, especially for distance under 10 miles. It would be nice to see segments distances of under 10 miles in length to be displayed to two decimal places (e.g. 1.92 miles) instead of just 1.9 miles as it currently is. Thanks, John 

35

Comments

15 comments
  • Yes, please add this feature. I mostly care about two decimal places for running short distances really fast. When I'm doing a fast 5K, knowing where I am from 3.00 to 3.10 miles is really important to me, especially when I'm trying to shave off even a few seconds. 

    2
    Comment actions Permalink
  • 0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • I vote for this too. Please show distances to two decimal places, or at least give the user the option to show one or two.

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • This would be a good idea. I just signed up for Strava because Garmin Connect was stuck in an upload freeze. Anyway, I appreciate that Strava works (unlike Garmin at the moment!), but if it only goes to one decimal place for short runs I can't see using it other than to check for elevation gain when Garmin's down (since I can harvest a two decimal place distance figure by just reading my watch).

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • This is the specific request I just came here to post about (distance and time). I run track competitively (800 and 1500) and would love if I knew what the exact times my fast intervals were at. 26.51 seconds is a lot faster than 27.49 seconds but they only show as 27. The same goes for distance. Living in New York City, I can't always get to a track so if I'm doing intervals in the park, .34 and .25 would both show as .3 and that is a huge difference. You can get a little more precision by going to metric units but it's still not enough and annoying to have to switch.

    Please expose more precision for time, distance and elevation grade!!

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • I also have request to make representation of distance more precise. For me, have 3.1KM and 3.2KM and nothing in between to precisely see what's in between is a huge drawback. Another example, when creating a segment of 400 meters, either I see 0.3 or 0.4. Now imagine I cannot do any segment creation with any more granularity, and predicting what is the exact spot where the segment hits 400 meters is just guess work. I see this as a must have requirement for me to continue further on my first month "premium" trial. Btw, I import data from Garmin Connect which already has that extra precision.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • In for support of two decimal places.  signed potential premium user using endomondo instead :(

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • +1

     

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • +1

    We really need more precision for time, distance and elevation grade.

    Still the same after 2 years of posts!!!

    2
    Comment actions Permalink
  • I got tired of waiting, a year of endomondo only cost me $20.

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • agree with other commenters. would be great to have more precision on the grade of climbs. Thanks!

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Segment grade is a wrong way to characterize a segment when there is a climb and a descent or more than one climb. I have segments that show as flat yet there is a serious amount of climb. Strava should use cumulative elevation gain instead of grade.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Any updates on this Strava ? I have a few loops of around 800meters segments. they all show as 0.8KM. however, I know that some are  805M and some are more 840M. Would be nice to see the extra precision...it surely has the capacity to display it as the actual RAW data has the real distance since my pace is accurate. I'll have slower pace on the 840meters segment then on the 805meters for the same effort.

    What we need is for you to come clean and honest and tell us about the feasibility. Maybe you're going to come back and say forget it with already created segment...too  complicated to re-calculate...that's fine...at least come out clean and give some honest feedback to your premium members.

    It's been 3 YEARS! that is not what I would call good customer service...

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • +1

    Pretty poor that this hasn't been added yet.

    But then  again, the underlying calculation looks as though it could be refined.

    This should all be very straight forward - another example as to why i can;t bring myself to pay for Strava....

     

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • There are many numbers with x decimals (123.45 km; 32.1 km/h; 2,356 kJ etc.), everything is so precise, but this number is a natural number between 0-12 e.g. there are hardly 12 possibilities? Come on. :-)

    0
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Didn't find what you were looking for?

New post