motorcyclebloggers.com

Here’s a string of emails between myself and some other enthusiasts about upcoming legislation in California related to bikes being emissions tested every other year all the way back to year 2000 models. Unlike several other states, California currently has no emission testing for motorcycles.

             From Terry

Biennial smog checks would be required for motorcycles manufactured in the 2000 model year and later under a bill making its way through the California Legislature.

Read more:

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-smog-motorcycles5-2009may05,0, 6008850.story

From Chris

I gotta say .. I’m torn on this topic.

On one hand, I welcome getting the loud bikes off the streets. Here in Harley-Land there is no doubt that nearly every loud exhaust “upgrade” is done to stroke the ego of the rider at the expense of us trying to enjoy a quiet afternoon in the yard, or a nice hike, or a stroll down main street. In my opinion, noise pollution ranks up there with particulate pollution.

(DIsclaimer: I had a VFR [sold to brother] with a Micron pipe … oooooohhhhh that sounded good…! Still had a cat, though)

On the other hand, many of us richen the fuel mixture. The bikes come stock very lean for EPA purposes. We richen the mixture to smooth out throttle response and improve driveability. I’m sure this affects emissions, as the O2 sensors are often disconnected to prevent the ECU from going into closed-loop.

I guess the devil is in the details of enforcement. My FJR would pass a visual inspection, but not a sniff test (I have a non-street Power Commander on it). The VFR would fail a visual, but pass a sniff test.

As I see it, the laws are already in place to handle the bulk of the offenders. There is a legal noise limit (92 db?) for street bikes, and most aftermarket exhausts violate that. If the noise laws were enforced, the emissions problem would go away.

From Rhino

There was no doubt this would happen. We’ve been exempt for far too long in my opinion. Cars have had to meet these standards for 20 years. We’ve been lucky, but that’s about to change in this present green consciousness era. And once enacted, it won’t go away!

The reason it’s finally coming for motorcycles, is that testing has finally become economically feasible. In the past, the equipment to do the testing on motorcycles (not the same as for cars) was too expensive compared to the number of units (motorcycles) which would be tested. We are only 1% of the vehicles on the road.

What surprises me about this legislation is the fact that the law is retroactive back to the 2000 model year. In my opinion, the line gets drawn in the sand now, since the law comes into effect now. Punishing previous activity is pretty lame and I imagine it will be quite difficult for people who’ve modified that 5 year old bikes to be able to purchase the original equipment necessary to meet the new standards, without great expense!

While I’ve been a major violator in the past, now that I’m older I realize the value in towing the emissions line. Don’t get me wrong, I haven’t gone green and I don’t believe Global Warming is only the result of man’s activity (ever hear of volcanoes, forest fires and cyclic temperature trends). But trying to reduce our waste and by-products signature can only help the environment.

Lately, I’ve been leaving most of my bikes basically stock, especially the air/fuel/exhaust system, because power gains as a result of modification are a lot more difficult these days compared to 20 years ago. Systems are so well tuned and “closed” by the manufacturers, that modifications now are as likely to reduce performance as to improve it. The only real justification these days is appearance, weight savings and sound. All of which are vanity, not really a legitimate argument. Even drivability is rarely improved by modification on the latest bikes.

And let’s take a realistic look at power.  I owned the baddest motorcycle on the planet in 1981, a Suzuki GS1100EX, which put out 86 HP and weighed about 550 lbs and did low - 11 second quarter miles. My 2003 SV650 makes 10 HP less and weighs 100 lbs less (giving it a comparable power to weight ratio) without any modifications using 1/2 the displacement and getting 10 MPG more. We’ve made a lot of progress in the last 30 years.

I guess I’m getting old, but I don’t feel the need to have a bike with a better power to weight ratio than anything I currently own. In fact, the amount of time I spend with the throttle to the stop on my 11 year old Yamaha R1 is less than 1% and it’s still a better bike than I am a rider. Half of the bikes I’ve purchased in the last 10 years have been less than 1000cc.

Get used limits on modifying anything that MAY effect our environment, it ain’t goin’ away anytime soon.

From Chris

I pretty much agree with you except the following statement:

Even drivability is rarely improved by modification on the latest bikes.

I disagree because nearly every bike I have owned somehow benefited from changing the fuel mixture. Some bikes ran smoother, some started better and got off the choke sooner, the Magna went from ‘blah” to “holy crap!”, the VFR lost a ‘flat spot’ at 5000 rpm, and the FJR didn’t lurch when applying a little throttle on entering a corner. The 1984 Honda VF500C and 1982 Kawasaki KZ1100 where the only two which I felt the fuel metering “right”.

To be honest, what surprises me the most is that motorcycles are still legal, considering the image we have of either being drunk pirates on loud cruisers or power ranger Rossi wannbe’s dodging cars and riding mile-long wheelies.

From Rhino

I understand why you would take exception, but most of the bikes you say you’ve improved the rideability on are NOT the “latest” models. I was meaning bikes created within the last 5 years, especially the fuel injected ones. I have virtually perfect driveability from the factory on the following bikes:

2008 Aprilia Shiver 750 (fuel injected)

2006 Yamaha R1 (fuel injected)

2006 Moto Guzzi Breva 1100 (fuel injected)

2005 Suzuki GSXR 750 (fuel injected) - particularly standout fueling, any RPM, any gear.

2005 Suzuki Bandit 1200 (carbureted)

The  only bikes I had driveability issues with were carbureted and more than 5 years old or the first fuel injected bikes (late ’90s, early ‘00). I’m sure there are many exceptions, but I think they are decreasing over time. I think fuel injection in combination with the latest exhaust technology is filling in the “driveability” holes that early fuel injection and most carburetors displayed. In other words, they are finally figuring out how to fuel inject bikes correctly.