Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Motorcycle.Com General Discussion > Motorcycle News > Old News > MO vs. World

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-25-2001, 01:11 PM   #11
starvingstudent
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 486
Default Re: New Streetbike Emissions

90+% of riders already have their mechanic do valve adjustments. Adding a cat to the deal changes nothing--BMW riders have been cat-equipped and happy for years.



And actually, I suspect that these regulations will limit classic bikes much more than modern bikes--after all, which has cleaner emissions, a stock R1100S or stock Harley Sportster?
starvingstudent is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 09-25-2001, 04:57 PM   #12
reinerka
Founding Member
 
reinerka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 6
Default Re: New Streetbike Emissions

The idea is good, however the question how to enforce some of those things remains a big question mark.



I would not like to see enforcement of specific systems, but rather values that must be met by manufacturers (stock or aftermarket). Initially this would most likely mean FI and Catalytic converters, but in the long run, maybe something better comes up and it would still be ok.



BMW has all those things for years and not a single problem doing so. Forcing others to follow is not a bad idea. As to performance, I doubt it would make such a big difference.



As well I would like to see those load pipes be history, since I never like it when somebody passes by sounding like an F16. What´s the point. I didn´t hear him any sooner than anyone else. It´s just not right to the majority and that is what should be protected.



But I still doubt they have thought anything about how to enforce the regulation. It´s like you have to have insurance but noone really cares. Other countries do a much better job there.
reinerka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2001, 05:04 PM   #13
Shadowspawn
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 29
Default Clue in.

Right, since the last figures I have seen say that we Americans are responsible for 25% of the global CO2 emissions, obviously air polution is the fault of the entire rest of the globe who are responsible for the other 75% right? I don't have a problem with you thinking the EPA should back off, since as a percentage of total emissions, bikes are probably really good, and if compared to a car on a emission per passenger mile, we are probably kicking everyone else butt. However to point a figure at the rest of the globe is silly. I doubt the 40+ days Houston had in violation of Ozone regs. was because of europe.
Shadowspawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2001, 05:07 PM   #14
Shadowspawn
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 29
Default Nah, it's called grandfathering

It is very rare that a vehical that has already been produced and purchased has to meet the new regulations release. For example, my 1974 VW does not have to meet any emissions requirements. Basically the classics will have a free pass, and anything made after the regulation takes effect will be screwed. Bet there will be a bit of a run on the bikes made right before the regs take effect. I know it my push my next purchase date foward....
Shadowspawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2001, 05:16 PM   #15
Nepenthe
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 46
Default Re: Aftermarket Pipes & Other Mods

I was under the impression that some of the 'anti-tampering' came in the form of engine parts which are sealed and can only be accessed by a certified/dealer mechanic--like carbs which only the dealer can open because of the bolts or something which disables the engine if any 'tampering' is done.



So when do we get to vote for EPA officials?
Nepenthe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2001, 05:39 PM   #16
Nepenthe
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 46
Default Re: Clue in.

No, bikes aren't 'kicking everyone else's butt' in emissions. Yes, as a percentage of total emissions, bikes represent a small slice of the smog pie--they also represent a small precentage of total vehicles on the road. But a bike itself isn't particularly clean.



As far as the rest of the world goes, ever heard of the Kyoto Agreement? It was brought before Congress in 1997 by Clinton, voted down 95 to nothing... Bush reaffirmed our refusal to accede to the wishes of the UN, which much of Europe and other nations again took as a slap in the face. So it's the civilized world which is going to be putting pressure on the US in the coming years...
Nepenthe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2001, 08:54 PM   #17
boxjoint
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 72
Default Re: New Streetbike Emissions

So much for the cheap do it all bike ehh! With fuel injection and catalyitic converters you won't be able to touch ANYTHING for under $7000.00, unless it's a Ninja 250. Imagine the costs of re-engineering all of those bikes that these companies put out.
boxjoint is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2001, 10:00 PM   #18
aminalmutha
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 105
Default Re: New Streetbike Emissions

Screw the EPA!!! They're going after the wrong 'problem'. Just look at their whole logic. A ULEV car produces very, very low emissions. Supposedly, a ULEV driving in LA expells cleaner air than it inhales. And they want to mandate so called ZEV's (ie. electric cars). Think about where a lot of electricity comes from. Coal. Natural gas. Oil. And what about all the toxins that you're carrying around in an EV? What happens when you get T-boned and a thousand pounds of battery acid are all over the ground? Gasoline evaporates quite easily. Not real enviro-friendly, but certainly not as nasty as battery acid. The point is, the EPA is targeting the driving (and riding) public when it's really probably not the major problem. Plus, pollution is generally better than it used to be. Factories can actually buy 'pollution credits' based on how many cars they crush so they don't have to follow as stringent pollution standards. I don't know if that program is still in use or not. What about factory pollution? Agricultural? Etc, etc. You just can't stop all air pollution. Hell, LA basin was supposedly smoggy when the first white dudes saw the place. The EPA would love to see the average car cost $50K and the average bike be half that, while gas would cost $5/gallon. I'm sure they'd be perfectly happy seeing nobody drive at all. Let's all live in super dense cities riding our bicycles around, living off solar power and simulated cheese product. We don't really need to be able to roam the country freely, do we? Oh, and noise pollution. Maybe the neighbor's dog needs a muffler. EPA, SPCA, and PETA approved, of course. What about big rigs and their Jake brakes? Hell, big rigs' tires are louder than a passing bike. How 'bout thunder? Or if you live by a beach, the waves? All those things are pretty loud, ya know. The point of this rant is that this is pointless legislation that will do no one any good. It won't help air or noise pollution, will only drive up costs, and generally make life more difficult for everyone. We have to fight these bastards. This is a perfect example of giving an inch and taking a mile. Don't budge!
aminalmutha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2001, 02:26 AM   #19
johnz
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 15
Default Re: New Streetbike Emissions

Great.



But a Chevy Suburban can pour out pollution becuase 'light trucks' have much less stringent EPA controls.

johnz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2001, 02:33 AM   #20
cbusa
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 9
Default Re: New Streetbike Emissions

That's the first post I've seen that had absolutely no facts in it.
cbusa is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off