I have been riding for over three decades. That is why I thought a little electronic helper would be a good idea to make up for the slowing responce time.
Ok, that’s great, good luck with that.
I’m still under the impression that you could stand to learn a bit more about motorcycles before embarking on that though. Your description of a rolling burnout was a little scary.
Do tell
Look, I didn’t mean to get into an argument with you. I’m not trying to prove anything here.
Having said that it doesn’t take a lot of experience to know your burnout technique could never work and is just plain dangerous. First you should practice burnouts from a stand still until you are comfortable with that. Find somewhere with a low abrasion surface, lift your butt off the seat and try to get the rear wheel spinning while holding the front brake. This can be pretty hard on the clutch, so be mindful of that. If everything is going pear shaped, use the clutch lever to cut the power, it’s quicker that way.
For a rolling burnout the process is similar. The goal is to lift weight from the rear to make it easier to break traction, or in other words, load the front. To load the front you need to let the suspension compress and do its job. If you are going flat out and just grab a handful of brake, it’s obvious you will lock the front and crash. That can never work. First you brake, aggressively but smoothly from a constant speed (don’t accelerate while you brake, that’s the clueless part), THEN you give it a lot of gas (keeping the clutch covered always for emergencies). Remember, the idea is to unload the rear wheel before using the throttle. Less load == less traction. Then you can let go of the brake and try to steer the burnout. It helps if you stand up.
What I was trying to get at is that you need to understand what you are doing, which should come naturally if you have been riding bikes over three decades, so I’ll just butt out.
I see I did a poor job of conveying what I did that day. I like what you posted , it is right on the money.
Or I did a poor job reading it. Anyway glad it was just a misunderstanding on my part, and mistakes are part of the game. As long as you are smart about your riding there is no shame in that as far as I am concerned.
I’m not clear if you’re interested in rate of change only or position plus rate of change but have you fully considered why you’d want to use rate of change at all? In a wheelie that will give you a stronger signal at lower angles than higher up, which mirrors your throttle action but not your brain’s sense of danger.
The nice thing about doing it all in software is you can tailor the warning to do exactly what you want. In this case, it might be: rate of angular change > x when angle > Y = warn, otherwise, no warn.