CA wants to smog check motorcycles
 

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...ory?track=rss~.

Nothing pisses me off more than someone who removes the catalytic converter on their bike to lose 2-3 kgs but dramatically increasing the pollution they emit.

I notice you ride a bike that does not have a CC.

if they don't measure the output of bikes, how do they know how much they are contributing?

well, someone thought it through.

I don't see what I have to do with this story, aside from having my own opinion.

You said nothing pisses you off more than people removing their CC. If they are so important to you why don't you ride a bike that has one?

I said remove what was already there. I didn't say anything about bikes that don't come with them stock.

Stay classy, Dave.

Yeah, that certainly can be a problem. I'd like to see the OEMs and aftermarket guys work on exhausts that can be a little louder than stock while keeping all the smog gear on there. i.e. the header or midpipe contains the CC while the endcan can be changed out. Then everyone wins.

How about aftermarket exhaust manufactures coming out with catalytic converts to put on bikes that dont' come with them stock???

This bike emits no polution at alll and cures any guilt you might have experienced after watching "An Incovienent Truth"
http://www.savingadvice.com/images/b...ty-bicycle.jpg

What is the difference between buying a bike without one and removing one from a bike that does?

semantics...

You know what pisses me off more than people removing the CC? Guys who compensate for a small pee-pee with obnoxiously loud exhaust.























Oh yeah, and FWIW, I could give two shits if people remove the CC. :lol:

One is modifying your bike so it pollutes more, the other is not?

one could argue that all that happens when the CC is removed is that it meets the same emission standards as those bikes that don't have one... are you saying that having one without a CC is somehow better?

Not trying to be a dick, just confused.

Actually I appreciate the rational comment. Thanks.

In a word, no. I would prefer a bike with a CC, all other things being equal.

A bike must meet the air standards applicable in the year it was made. My bike is a 2005 and comes without a CC. It met emissions standards in TX that year. I'm sure bikes sold in CA in the last year or two had to have CCs simply to meet the ever-tightening air standards. I have no problem with people rolling around on older, non-CC bikes - they were legal when they were sold and still are legal due to grandfather clauses. But you can't buy a 2008, remove the CC and claim it meets 2005 standards so it is legal.

that is the answer to the question.

also, in some states they will not pass inspection with an after market exhaust.

Longer than a year or 2: the SV has had a CA version since at least 2003 as it was an option back when I bought my bike (they weren't options but were mandatory if I were to buy it in CA at the time)... IIRC, it has a decreased fuel capacity in order to fit all the additional "stuff" for the emissions system.

:D

Thx for the response and not thinking that I was being a dick... for once, I wasn't trying to be :lol:

this argument makes about as much sense as a vegan saying he can wear a fur coat and leather pants cause they were a gift from his mom.

lol a lot of illegal motorcycles will be on the street

:lol:

Every motorcycle on the street running an exhaust without a DOT approved stamp is already illegal...in every state

This has nothing to do with pollution and everything to do with cash for the government coffers

:troof:

Explain to me where the government makes money on this? You, the driver, pay for a smog check until you pass. The payment goes to the business doing the smog check, not the gov't. A cop can't give you a smog ticket because he can't check the emissions levels.

The article was quite clear: motorcycles are used for 1% of the total mileage but emit 10% of the total pollution. It's obvious something needs to be done to make them cleaner.

mhmmmmmmmmmmmm

I grew up in LA. Smog inspections are ridiculous. One of my first cars was a Nissan 260Z. I had a triple Weber carb set up on it so I could not run the stock thermostatic air cleaner on it and I would fail the emissions automatically on a visual check. It was a huge hassle. I had to go to a "referee" station 20 miles from where I lived and I had to have them look at it. Eventually it got a waiver because the car was a certain age(at the time the car was 13 years old) plus to go back to the stock set up it would have cost over $500. It's a joke, the money goes to the state of California with the smog inspection station getting a nominal fee. Don't kid yourself by thinking the state has no financial gain on emission inspections.

Two of my three bikes have exhaust systems that are not street legal anywhere in the world. Guess what- I don't care.

If you don't like it, you're welcome to follow me around and inhale the exhaust yourself to keep it from damaging the environment. ;)

You don't get a State Inspection Sticker?

I grew up in LA also. I remember the brown air.

They charge enough to pay for the system itself. I assume you are an expert in the CA smog process?

The actual rule: Standard CA Smog Fee of $8.25 plus the dealer may not charge more than an additional $50. Sounds to me like the inspector is the one getting the bulk of the fee. That's $4/yr/vehicle.

The brown air is mostly gone now due in part to that $8.25 fee.

I love living in the country. No smog inspections here and no smog. I remember our neighboring counties where bitching at us and one of our politicians mentioned how wind usually travels from west to east (we are east of Atlanta) and that we'd be glad to put up some giant fans and blow their shit back to them.

Don't like smog. Don't live in a city.

can you explain how they know that %? they already said they don't check them so how do they know?

And, because it's written on the internet it must be true.

I find that number a little bit difficult to believe. REALLY difficult to believe. A cop can, RIGHT NOW, give you a ticket for an aftermarket exaust on your motorcycle that has the words *for race use only* on it, which are the majority. You did know that, right??

They don't check bikes after they are sold. New bikes still have to meet an air quality standard - why do you think they are putting CCs on them now? - but the quality standard is much lower than cars.

This article is about checking them regularly after they are sold so people don't remove the CC.

The 10x number is a number I've heard numerous times. That doesn't make it true but when I start my bike up, it stinks. When I start my car up, it does not. Both are 2005 MY. There's a nose test for you. :)

He's not writing you a ticket for failing a smog test. Your scenario has nothing to do with what we are discussing.

so, you're saying that they let MC's get away with 10% more emissions than they do cars.

wasn't the way I read the article but ok.

have you looked at the plugs on the DRZ? your mixture could be off. are you comparing carbed to FI?

Not 10%, 10 times as much. And a 60s era Vespa puts out about 100x what a modern car does. Next time you see a hipster on an old Vespa, tell him he's being a dick to Mother Earth. :D

Boy, this thread took right off, di'n't it? :lol:

Wait, you said 10% of the total pollution.

[goes back to look]

Yes, that is what you said...

Your bike smells to you because you're sitting on top of the exhaust. Your car's exhaust doesn't pump into the cabin. So, of COURSE you don't smell it. Not a very scientific response, Mike.

This was a point of interest in my Environmental Science class today. My professor owns a consulting firm and is an expert when it comes to this topic. The numbers here seem off to him :idk:

Now that we've all gone around and around - what exactly is the point of all this? Trying to point out there SHOULD be catalytic converters on motorcycles and they should be left on? Testing? Who's money are we spending now?

That I can do. :rockwoot:

Yeah Moira, those numbers are way off and the only way it could be true is if they only tested 2 strokes. But that's how how environmentalists work. It was the same thing with Freon, claimed it zoomed right up to the upper atmosphere and attacked the ozone layer (but somehow only over Australia :idk: ) and they totally overlooked the fact that Freon is heavier than air and when released into air...sinks to the lowest possible level... chemistry 101. All the greenhouse gas bs is the same, rediculously insuficient fact to support a theory to make themselfs feel better about feeling guilty for using resources. Funny that the oil was supposed to run out back in the early 80's too when we used up the dinosaurs.

I saw a bumper sticker on a car once..."save the planet, ride a horse" oxymoron or just moron :idk: :lol:

Yes, and they make up 1% of the total population. Therefore on a per capita basis, the average bike pollutes 10x more than the average car.

I'm talking about starting the car and standing near the rear bumper. The difference in smell is obvious to me but I did explicitly state it was not very scientific and certainly can vary due to engine temp, etc.

Getting people to ask those questions of themselves is the point. That's when a useful, intellectual discussion can start rather than your typical Internet forum flamefest. I've made my opinion clear.

It smells like burning.

You aren't referring to ALL pollution. You are referring to passenger vehicles' smog-forming emissions. Or, that's what the article refers to.

The numbers:
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b56/azoomm/Chart.jpg

So, the ONLY number of concern for motorcycles are the CO numbers. I mean, we wouldn't worry about any others as they are significantly lower than any other. Right?

You understand that transportation only has a 7% impact on Particulate Matter - which actually has more of an affect on asthma and smog than VOC's. That is OVERALL pollution. And, motorcycles don't come into play there. [referring to the chart] My 7% number comes from my research project and text book used for my class.

Did you notice on their report that lawn and garden equipment actually had a higher output of CO than on-road motorcycles? So, those should have converters too...

my bike HAD a cat. in '00, orig. owner changed exhaust , i think even '99 VFRs had cats. it;s non-CA.

they've been around quite a while, yes my exhaust is illegal.

My bike doesn't have a cat. But, my pipe is race use only. So, mine is illegal as well.

My cat was sleeping on my bike this morning but I kicked her off... uh oh....

I believe I've heard they're planning on doing this too.

I'm late, and didn't read the whole thing, but I think the complain with MC's is that while they might emit less/vehicle, they tend to emit a lot compared to engine size, and passenger count.

Toss in the rampant changing to off-road exhaust systems, and you have a big basket of low hanging fruit.

Even if the total emission output of MC's isn't a large portion of the total emission output.

I don't know the units, timespan, location or any other background or context about the numbers in your chart. So I can't agree or disagree with any conclusions about the chart. :idk:

I applaud cleanup of other sources too. Motorcycles shouldn't be unfairly targeted or exempted, more than any other emission source.

:rockwoot: Well said.

Mike, the numbers I posted are from the study in the article YOU posted. Didn't you read them?

The off-road emissions reported are significantly less than those reported for on-road. My problem is with HOW they came up with their numbers. They are all estimations that aren't outlined as to how they came up with their estimations. Meaning - did they use a Harley, DRZ, VFR, 998, CBR, or Vespa for their research?

They [you] are throwing numbers at me that are ESTIMATES without being substantiated. That is the problem.

I don't see any numbers or spreadsheets linked from the article, so no, I didn't read them.

I can't really argue this point - I don't know the details of the study anymore than you do.

I've only thrown one number at you: 10x the pollution. Here's the quote from the article:

10 / 0.8 = 12.5x so I was actually underreporting the problem.

You are pulling numbers from an article that is based on the numbers I posted.

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/onroad/onroad.htm That has the explanation of how those numbers were found - they weren't, they were estimated. Since motorcycles are currently NOT required to have emissions tests, where do those numbers come from? They are gathered from specific bikes - then estimated across the board. Now, if you were trying to get legislation passed - what would you use? A bike that has low emissions or high emissions? Either way - THAT isn't defined.

The numbers are found: http://www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/ems...09&F_AREA=CA#7

Would you like me to draw a better PICTURE?? Since most people deal better with pictures than numbers... let me provide that from the PDF below. This is from THEIR study. Motorcycle is the MC on the right. Clearly, it's a HUGE problem.

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b56/azoomm/Graph.jpg

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/onroad/briefs/emfac7.pdf

most if not all slip-ons retain the cat, yet are still illegal. just a side note.



this idea is as dumb as the idea of banning black cars to lower pollution. remember that thread?

Nice work! I wonder if the numbers quoted in the article are based on raw data from another set. Either way, good detective work.

Good point. I think they are illegal because they don't pass noise laws?


That was a hoax. http://www.snopes.com/politics/traffic/darkcars.asp

Have I told you lately how much I love you? :lol:

They ARE based on those numbers. But, spun so they serve the purpose of panic. Welcome to media.

That doesn't mean CC aren't needed - it means they are a SMALL, itty bitty, tiny set of the problem that should be addressed. But, because we are the re-headed step children of the motor world - and non-motorcyclist that ARE the majority already see us as a problem - they can't save us from ourselves, so they need to save themselves from us.

I'm really tired of it.

Can't tell, can you? :lol:

I don't know how they came up with these numbers.

But I have seen systems iirc being run in Ca which uses a laser to shine on exhaust as it's coming out of the vehicle while it's traveling down the road, where they can tell how much pollution is coming from each vehicle as it passes by. So they very well could have used empirical data taken from actual traffic.

Zoomie, it's really easy to fall into the "us vs them" trap. You can either believe a conspiracy or you can believe you don't have all the facts. I almost always choose the latter as it's more in line with Occam's Razor: “The simplest explanation for a phenomenon is most likely the correct explanation."

I'm sure your numbers are right - but they don't tell the whole story. Specifically my guess is they are estimates based on pollution numbers from the factories based on stock machines i.e. motorcycles are not a big problem when they have all the CC and pollution equipment installed. In other words, IMO the numbers you quote don't show the current state but the best case state. Seen in that light, the numbers quoted in the article no longer seem like panic/FUD/bias/wrong to me.

Mike. The point I'm trying to make - those numbers are THEIR numbers, not mine. I pulled those from the site of the agency the LA Times was quoting. So, if there are numbers - they are THEIRS. :wink:

Do you SEE the frustration.

So, you say I'm wrong and they are right?? Wait... but, it's THEIR numbers and their quotes that I'm looking at. So, they are wrong - but the media is right? Fuck... who's right?

Who's on first?

Lies, damn lies and statistics. :idk:

Let's wrap up this discussion: Kids, be nice and keep the CC on your bike if possible, mmmkay?

Just cus you play the holier-than-thou card doesn't mean the rest of us aren't "being nice." If we're too much for ya, I'm sure lifetimetv.com has kinder gentler forums for ya.

Awesome. So, we can move back to the other topic then about you not breeding? :nee:

Next time, if you're going to preach to me - you best read the actual numbers you're going to spout.

did I miss something? looks like the bars for the motorcycle are shorter than all but 4 of the classes.

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b56/azoomm/Graph.jpg

Nope.

That's the picture. That's the TERRIFYING data... motorcycles are going to ruin the air quality for everyone around them.

BUT IT'S 10x THE CARS!!!!

:willy: WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE :willy:

I'll keep the CC on my bike if/when you get rid of your bike without one...

Deal?

:lol:

Love the ":willy:" smilies :lmao:

We ought to name it "ohnoes" or "chickenlittle" :lol:

I believe your graph is wrong, I've already explained why. Sounds like you are getting just as holy-as-thou. Pot, meet kettle.

*ahem* Hi! I'm Nee... I'm the one who called you holier-than-thou. Sorry, I realize it's easy to confuse Zoomie and I (after all, we're both brilliant, talented, and have excellent taste in bikes). However, just for clarification, we are two different people, K? Thanks!

Preach = holier-than-thou, k? Someone who preaches is generally considered to be holier-than-thou.

Pardon me, Your interpretation of their graph.

I love Internet forums. Just wondering at this point when Godwin's Law will be invoked.

the first chart showed that MC's have less than most of the others too. I thought I was reading it wrong but guess not.

Shhh... just drink the kool-aid, and everything will be juuuuussst fiiiinnee...

:lala:

Cause I feel devious
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l3...165595-bdc.jpg

Nice pic, Gas. :D

Every number I've quoted in this thread is from the original article. "the kool-aid" is not my opinion, it's what ARB says is reality. You're welcome to believe Zoomie's interpretation. I just happen to believe the ARB since they are the experts.

They're totally unbiased, too. Right? :lol

You DO realize that it's difficult to take you seriously when your argument is basically "Do as I say NOT as I do" right?

Hitler and Nazis!

There. Thread over. :lol:

President Bush hates black people - Kanye West.

Honestly I did little attention to this... My opinion is whatever... my chop had no CC and no mufflers on 117CI

I can't believe you can't read the information and come to your own conclusions.

Oh well maybe that would've been clearer if anyone besides YOU was preaching in this thread. :lol:

snort

Thanks... I think I just drank green tea up my nostrils... :dvrofl:

I snorted motor oil and gasoline!

Plus one

But, people would bitch because the exhausts would cost more.

By the way, my bike is way old (2001), but because it was a CA bike it has catylitic converters, O2 sensor, PAIR valves, and charcoal cannister.

Works for me...........Yet, people are gonna complain that now those mowers cost $200 more.......To that I say whoopdie-do, if you want to be a yuppie and keep your yard nice like the Joneses, pay the price.

My R6 and my Aprilia RSV had their cats inside the muffler, so changing to a slipon would have removed the cat.

<3 Azoom and Nee.

Here's my take on this. You say motorcycles account for a trivial percentage of total pollution, and I agree. But we still prosecute shoplifters even though what they steal represents a trival percentage of all stolen goods, right?

She isn't saying CCs aren't needed, she is just trying to make a point of how the motorcycles aren't even the huge problem they proclaim them to be. On top of that she also points out that these numbers are estimated.


I am surprised no one even mentioned the fact that most motorcycles don't even see the same amount of use at people's cars.

OK, let's get this straight... I didn't say anything. The ARB did.

I simply owned pdog with the data he was freaking out over. That is, if he would actually READ the reports behind what the media is spewing rather than just throwing it up on a page and striking an uneducated view.

I care a LOT about the environment, and do what I can to offset the HUGE footprint I have on this planet (with my business, and all). There are so many other places to work on FIRST that are easier and more effective than a catalytic converter on a motorcycle. And, I don't recall anyone saying that they actually would or wouldn't take one off... other than pdog. Most of us here don't own a bike that had/has one.

THAT is my point.

Why are you running around digging up drama, anyway :nee:

Fair enough. I still think the only reason motorcycles haven't been required to get smog-tested thus far is simply because it would probably cost more than it's worth to administer all the testing......Not because the % of pollution they put out is trivial.

Really? None of you have a new bike? As far as I know, ALL new sportbikes, even outside CA, have cats..........someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Cuz it's fun.......and because you fuckers keep throwing up 10-page threads before I ever get a chance to post. :lol

Slacker.

That is why God created women, cell phones, and SUVs. SUVs are taking care of those pollutin motorcyclists everyday.

I can sort of attest to your theory but the lady that almost killed me was unusual in her tactics. Instead of just mowing me down, she used a high end european car, a blackberry and blond hair to run into a truck with a pregnant young couple, which then ran into a much larger suv with 4 pretty chill black dudes in it, which then tried to run me over.

She basically morphed into a black dude in a Blazer. Those blonds I tell ya, they are just holding everyone down.

She's a smart one. She must be taken out

When you were a kid, did you have a neighbor with a big yard and a mean dog, that scared you so bad it'd make you piss your pants and then the bullies at school would kick your ass?

Oh, I forgot, they must have had a huge black fire belching SUV or truck as well.....

DAMn I forgot about this thread.

Azoomm, ur awesome :D Good research I didn't feel like going into because I knew it was useless ;) Facts are useless to most people these days.

pdog, what's your address? I'll send you one of those "Save the planet, Ride a horse" bumper stickers to put on your CC equiped car, suv, truck, etc. But you have to carry a pooper scooper and bio-degradable baggies on your horse so the shit doesn't contibute to green house gasses. BTW, when you talk you're emitting CO2... hell just quit breathing, you're contributing, k?