Boycott Denver

[gasser]

If the city of Denver is going to start to discriminate against aftermarket pipes, I say we should boycott Denver. This city makes a ton of money in the surrounding areas every year because of bikers. I say we thumb our noses at them and boyott the city. I don't plan to spend my touring dollars there if they decide to target bikers for noise violations. What's next? Will they isolate sport bikes and ticket crotch rocket riders because some of them do wheelies on the highway?

I have the ability to boycott them in business for conferences and will do so if this predatory ordinance goes into effect. When a city targets a group of people, like bikers, they deserve whatever they get in return. If you've been to Denver lately, you know they ought to target thier illegal alien population--THAT is the real problem there.

I'm not crazy about the loud pipes, and I especially don't like to ride behind them,. and a little restraint would help, BUT their enforcement of this will be arbitrary at best.

[Bud]

I'm going to spend money in Denver to show support of a city that is willing to take on the issue.

 

The loud pipe crowd just helps people to justify their stereotyping of all motorcycle riders as socially offensive.

 

my .02 Your Mileage Will Vary

[smiller]

Noise pollution is no less onerous than any other kind of pollution. While I wish it wasn't necessary I'm in favor of Denver's action, or at least in deciding to penalize the offenders rather than take the easy way out and ban motorcycles in general.

[onmyrt]

I'm sorry friend, but I find loud pipes to be an invasive annoyance, along with booming car stereos.

 

It's all about ' NOTICE ME! NOTICE ME!! NOTICE ME!!!'.

 

Please........... grow up, get a life, and give us all a break.

 

More power to Denver if they can silence them.

 

I just wish someone in this berg had the balls to raise the same issue.

[JayW]

Count me out. Loud pipes are a major nuisance, hurt the reputations of the rest of us, and those who use them in public areas are inconsiderate and selfish. Something's got to be done, and I support Denver's efforts to deal with the problem.

 

Jay

[Redbrick]

Sorry, can't agree.... I don't like loud pipes and would like to see the law enforced in our town...Some are obnoxiously loud and many riders have an "in your face" attitude with them.....A friend suggested taking a picture of the stamped-in EPA type conformance statement that's on every bike, presenting it to the police chief and ask why the law isn't enforced....

 

 

Phil........Redbrick

[ben1364]

Count me out. Loud pipes are a major nuisance, hurt the reputations of the rest of us, and those who use them in public areas are inconsiderate and selfish. Something's got to be done, and I support Denver's efforts to deal with the problem.

Jay

 

I'm with you Jay. Loud exhausts endanger rights. Ours!

Ben

[Bob Palin]

While agreeing that loud pipes need to be dealt with the problem in Denver is that, as I understand the law, the definition of "loud" is if the pipe doesn't have a marking on it. This gives them the opportunity to give you a ticket even if your pipes are quiet. (I don't have a solution, just a problem)

[David]

I agree* with you completely. Boycott Denver, indeed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*But my reason is mainly their sorry football team taking one of our key players. Let's make some noise about that.

[Laffo IBA#34115]

O.K., I'll bite. I rarely pipe in about anything but I think in this case I will stand firm with the quiet crowd. In fact, I am thinking about making a special ride specifically to Denver to show my support. It might be quiter there if they actually enforce the law. Loud pipes do not save lives, they annoy people.

[JayW]

What's next? Will they isolate sport bikes and ticket crotch rocket riders because some of them do wheelies on the highway?

 

What's wrong with that? Public roads are no place to practice wheelies, especially in traffic - such riders should be ticketed - in fact give them two tickets if (s)he also has loud pipes!

 

Jay

[SageRider]

One question I have is that are all pipes which are emissions legal required to have the EPA stamp on them? If yes, then this ordinance not only addresses loud pipes, but also illegal emissions modifications as well. I do not see this as a bad thing.

If pipes can be emissions legal and noise legal but not require the EPA stamp, then this ordinance is a problem.

 

In any case, to me, loud pipes belong at the track, not the city.

[smiller]

Using the stamp in place of a noise measurement is not the best way to go but probably the only practical choice, as providing every LEO with the equipment and training to properly measure noise levels is not very feasible (if indeed a reliable noise measurement can even be made in typical conditions by the side of a busy road.) It seems unlikely that an LEO would bother to ticket a bike for excessive noise if excessive noise was not in evidence, even without a stamp, as they no doubt have better things to do. This does leave a lot up to the discretion of the LEO and I can see why one might not be totally comfortable with that, but again I'm not sure that there's another practical solution. At least there's a way to tag the most selfish offenders, and in the (probably very rare) cases of true unfair discrimination one can always have their day in court.

[John in VA]

There is no constitutional right to blast everybody's ears with deliberately obnoxious and completely unnecessary exhaust noise. If the people of Denver collectively have decided to take action to keep unnecessary noise down in their own city, I support them -- as long as they aren't attempting a sweeping ban of all motorcycles just to stop a few goons on farting straight-piped Harleys.

[RonStewart]

This is sure a BMW forum. I'll bet the squid and cruiser forums have a different consensus.

 

I hate loud pipes, and want them banned too. Spent an unpleasant evening in Carlsbad, NM listening to the straight pipes going back and forth.

[SteveSardone]

If I was going to discriminate against anyone it would be against the businesses that cater to the loud pipe crowd and the loud pipe crowd itself. I have a pretty laid back life so the loud pipes are close to the most annoying(and painful) thing I encounter on a daily basis.

[Mike]

When a city targets a group of people, like bikers, they deserve whatever they get in return. If you've been to Denver lately, you know they ought to target thier illegal alien population . . .

 

I agree. They definitely should not target any group . . . unless it's a group that we want them to target.

 

But, as much as I dislike the idea of an ordinance that singles out motorcyclists, this makes a lot of sense to me. The noise generated by dim-witted motorcyclists is genuinely obnoxious. In the town where I live, a couple of bars generate a lot of biker business. When the maroons with straight pipes arrive on the scene, it's not just mildly annoying. The noise level is high enough that it's impossible to carry on a conversation.

 

Is the Denver approach the optimal solution? Probably not. But, I completely understand why they've adopted this ordinance and applaud the notion of trying to do something about the problem.

 

Here's a more productive idea: boycott the manufacturers of these products. They're the threat to motorcycling.

[Carnadero]

Some are obnoxiously loud and many riders have an "in your face" attitude with them...

What gets on my nerves is that around these parts (and probably just about everywhere else), a lot of them will really gun the throttle after they get going, whether it be from a stop sign/light, or after having moved into the roadway from a driveway, and many times there's no traffic-related reason for doing that. The resulting rat-a-tat-tat noise can be heard for blocks. At night, the sound carries even further.

[GregB]

Count me out also. I support Denver and hope for similar laws everywhere along with enforcement.

 

I find it unlikely that they will be able to ticket enough of the really loud ones but I wish them luck in their attempt to "fix" the problem.

 

I don't mind something a bit louder than stock but LOUD has to go. I agree with every one of the above reasons that some people have really loud pipes. I particularly agree that they reflect poorly on the rest of us.

[Dick_at_Lake_Tahoe_NV]

The "Straight Pipe" Harley riders I know wear ear-plugs. Seems pretty Hypocritical to me!

[upflying]

Let's boycott California, loud aftermarket pipes have long been illegal here. Of course, the law is seldom enforced.

One of the reason's why I chose/like BMW's is I am not forced by peer pressure to install loud pipes.

Any motorcyclist should be cited and arrested for reckless driving for performing wheelies on the highway. Why should the public tolerate being endangered by these squids and hooligans?

BTW, only INS/Border Patrol can enforce illegal alien statutes. Local police are strictly hands off. Contact your elected representatives for further information.

[TowJam]

God bless Denver.

 

Absolutely no sympathy for the loud pipe crowd from me. I like the sound of throaty pipes (as opposed to the wet fart of the boxer) but loud pipes are nothing more than over-compensation.

[Lets_Play_Two]

One of the reason's why I chose/like BMW's is I am not forced by peer pressure to install loud pipes.

 

Now you are only forced to buy radar detector, GPS, loud horns, new seat, new windshield....etc.

[E30TECH]

...a lot of them will really gun the throttle after they get going.....At night, the sound carries even further.

 

 

The sonzabitches near me like run WOT down my street in 2nd gear while the entire neighborhood is asleep.

[Lets_Play_Two]

This is an honest question so don't think I am trying to tweak anyone. There is a thread on here about installing stiebel horns that produce a 135dB sound. I think I remember someone has actually installed two of these. Where does this fall in the "loud" debate? Is it okay for loud horns to save lives? Or do we need a definition that includes duration as well as loudness?

[rogera]

This is an honest question so don't think I am trying to tweak anyone. There is a thread on here about installing stiebel horns that produce a 135dB sound. I think I remember someone has actually installed two of these. Where does this fall in the "loud" debate? Is it okay for loud horns to save lives? Or do we need a definition that includes duration as well as loudness?

 

Apples and Oranges, Horns can save lives. Loud pipes piss

people off including me. I wish they would enforce that law down here.

[Burt]

This is an honest question so don't think I am trying to tweak anyone. There is a thread on here about installing stiebel horns that produce a 135dB sound. I think I remember someone has actually installed two of these. Where does this fall in the "loud" debate? Is it okay for loud horns to save lives? Or do we need a definition that includes duration as well as loudness?

A loud horn is only used when its necessary to warn someone. Loud pipes are loud all the time, even when the rider isn't trying to be obnoxious.

[BSAtoBMW]

Thanks for the info. I'll put Denver on my must visit list!

Load pipes are very dumb. If you want people to look at you try wearing a pink suit with feather!

[russell_bynum]

Just one comment for all you guys saying this is a great idea because you hate all the racket of a straight-pipe cruiser....

 

It isn't just the straight pipes that'll be outlawed by this. The RT with a Remus with the pre-muffler and the silencer baffle installed (barely louder than stock) would also be illegal.

 

I see a fair number of aftermarket pipes on BMW's...all of those folks will be impacted by this ordinance as well, regardless of how loud (or not) their bike is.

 

For the record, I think that this isn't a bad law and I'm not entirely opposed to it (even though 4 of my 6 motorcycles would not be in compliance). Looking for the EPA stamp seems like a fairly easy way to enforce a noise ordinance, and it provides opportunity for aftermarket companies to make their exhausts compliant. That will increase cost, of course but it seems like the most straightforward way to enforce noise ordinances vs. having cops sitting on the side of a busy road with a sound meter.

[Ken H.]

I'm going to spend money in Denver to show support of a city that is willing to take on the issue.

 

The loud pipe crowd just helps people to justify their stereotyping of all motorcycle riders as socially offensive.

+1

[Ken H.]

If I was going to discriminate against anyone it would be against the businesses that cater to the loud pipe crowd and the loud pipe crowd itself.

Why? It isn't the businesses that are breaking the law, it's the bike owners.

[Lets_Play_Two]

This is an honest question so don't think I am trying to tweak anyone. There is a thread on here about installing stiebel horns that produce a 135dB sound. I think I remember someone has actually installed two of these. Where does this fall in the "loud" debate? Is it okay for loud horns to save lives? Or do we need a definition that includes duration as well as loudness?

A loud horn is only used when its necessary to warn someone. Loud pipes are loud all the time, even when the rider isn't trying to be obnoxious.

 

Ah. So when is it necessary? Imminent collison threat? When they don't move away from a light quickly enough or don't exit the fast lane as soon as you think they should? Or someone is using a cell phone and you don't think they should?

 

So loud horns are okay because the noise doesn't last as long? And this may be the reason they don't piss off people. Do we know that loud horns don't piss off people? Or is it we don't care if we piss off people with use of loud horns? If a kid pulls up next to you at a light and turns up his car stereo is that okay or does it piss you off? Just wondering?

 

BTW, I don't like loud pipes either and I think someone blowing an air horn in my ear would piss me off.

[Ken H.]

There is a thread on here about installing stiebel horns that produce a 135dB sound. I think I remember someone has actually installed two of these. Where does this fall in the "loud" debate?

When it's stuck on so it make noise all the time like the pipes on the bikes do.

 

Or when there is a law saying horns can only be so many db loud.

 

Until then, I see no coloration between the two.

[Ken H.]

(barely louder than stock)

But Russell, that's your interpretation of how much louder than stock it is. Your "barely" is the next person's "horribly" louder than stock.

 

That's the whole problem with the issue; everybody thinks their particular bike is not 'too' loud no matter how loud it actually is.

[Lets_Play_Two]

There is a thread on here about installing stiebel horns that produce a 135dB sound. I think I remember someone has actually installed two of these. Where does this fall in the "loud" debate?

When it's stuck on so it make noise all the time like the pipes on the bikes do.

 

Or when there is a law saying horns can only be so many db loud.

 

Until then, I see no coloration between the two.

 

That is part of my question. Do these noise ordinances affect horns or just pipes? We also complain about car stereos. In the town I live in there is a noise ordinance about standby generators...not only noise levels but times of operation, etc. It is easy to say horns aren't a problem because they aren't on all the time, I just think when we applaud we need to know what we get with the encore. If the senior citizen lobby in south Florida started complaining about those inconsiderate BMW riders and their loud horns, the politicians around here will listen.

[Ken H.]

Do we know that loud horns don't piss off people?

I still think it is apples to oranges, but here's the key thing - One biker honking one loud horn at one person, may piss off that one person. Or I'll even give you a couple of people in the immediate area.

 

But one biker on a loud piped bike riding down a street in a city at 11:00 PM is literally disrupting and pissing off hundreds of people as he/she goes along. Multiply that by hundreds of loud bikes and you've got just exactly what we've got - A growing public backlash against motorcycles.

[russell_bynum]

(barely louder than stock)

But Russell, that's your interpretation of how much louder than stock it is. Your "barely" is the next person's "horribly" louder than stock.

 

That's the whole problem with the issue; everybody thinks their particular bike is not 'too' loud no matter how loud it actually is.

 

Bullsh*t. The amount of noise coming out of an exhaust is easy to measure.

 

You also don't have to be the head cashier at Walmart to tell that something's about the same/a bit louder/much louder/hideously louder than something else.

 

True...some people have no sense of proportion and will not be able to tell the difference. Those people are called "idiots".

[steve.foote]

I'm with you brother! Most of the dimwits around here don't have the sense to know that riders with loud pipes are only doing the public a service. Loud pipes signify that the rider is a bad hombre and announces his presence, giving those who lack in badassidness time to run for cover, thereby protecting them from the badness which obviously would be bestowed upon them by the aforementioned rider.

 

Remember, "loud pipes saves lives" isn't just about protecting the rider.

[Bud]

This is an honest question so don't think I am trying to tweak anyone. There is a thread on here about installing stiebel horns that produce a 135dB sound. I think I remember someone has actually installed two of these. Where does this fall in the "loud" debate? Is it okay for loud horns to save lives? Or do we need a definition that includes duration as well as loudness?

 

I have one of those horns on my bike and I'm not offended by your question.

 

My answer is that I only use the horn as a method to alert other drivers, for a very short period of time, of my presence in the lane into which they are trying to occupy, in spite of the fact that I'm already there.

 

Now, if I blew the horn, continuously, the whole time I was riding it would be rude, inconsiderate and most likely in violation of some (maybe)noise ordinances. And I would be in the same category of those who ride bikes with loud pipes, rev them up at each stop light, whenever they cruise through residential neighborhoods or any other time they are trying to attract attention to themselves.

 

If you don't see the difference, then there is no need to have a further discussion and we will just agree to disagree.

 

my .02 Your mileage will vary.

[Bill_Walker]

While agreeing that loud pipes need to be dealt with the problem in Denver is that, as I understand the law, the definition of "loud" is if the pipe doesn't have a marking on it. This gives them the opportunity to give you a ticket even if your pipes are quiet. (I don't have a solution, just a problem)

 

In principle, I agree. In practice, they couldn't come up with a reasonably enforceable definition of "loud". Repeatable test procedures with a sound meter are very difficult to perform in the field. So, now the enforcement option is "Hmm, that sounds loud. Pull him over and check the pipe for the label." Pretty easy.

[Ken H.]

Subjective terms:

 

"about"

"a bit"

"much"

"hideously"

 

Objective term:

 

"80db at 25 ft"

 

It's all as simple as that. You're in compliance or your not. All the rest of the discussion is just attempts at self-justification.

[DavidEBSmith]

Bullsh*t. The amount of noise coming out of an exhaust is easy to measure.

 

Actually, it's easy to measure, it's hard to measure accurately from a law enforcement perspective.

 

The EPA standard involves a ride-by measurement, which is impractical for LEOs. ("Hey, I've stopped you for having a loud pipe, please go around the block and ride by me again so I can get a sound level reading. I'll just stand here and wait.")

 

The SAE standard involves a stationary reading at a specified angle from the exhaust at a certain distance at an RPM a certain percentage of maximum. That's more doable on the side of the road, but it's easy to get the angle or distance wrong, the test can be affected by being in an area like a narrow canyon or street where the sound gets reflected, and there's the problem of equipping lots of LEOs with expensive sound meters that need to be calibrated from time to time.

 

It's real easy to look for an EPA certification stamped on a pipe.

 

And if you bought an expensive aftermarket pipe that was labeled "for off-road use only" and didn't check to see if it complied with EPA regulations? Oh well, too bad, so sad.

[smiller]

That's more doable on the side of the road, but it's easy to get the angle or distance wrong, the test can be affected by being in an area like a narrow canyon or street where the sound gets reflected, and there's the problem of equipping lots of LEOs with expensive sound meters that need to be calibrated from time to time.

Not to mention that the vehicle under test is likely to be operated by some asshat who is absolutely determined to be as uncooperative as possible with the whole process.

 

For all of the reasons so far mentioned it seems pretty clear that a physical measurement of the sound level would just not be practical in the real world. Requiring certified (by a physical stamp) compliance with a standard is an imperfect second choice but is also about the only reasonable option.

[Lets_Play_Two]

This is an honest question so don't think I am trying to tweak anyone. There is a thread on here about installing stiebel horns that produce a 135dB sound. I think I remember someone has actually installed two of these. Where does this fall in the "loud" debate? Is it okay for loud horns to save lives? Or do we need a definition that includes duration as well as loudness?

 

I have one of those horns on my bike and I'm not offended by your question.

 

My answer is that I only use the horn as a method to alert other drivers, for a very short period of time, of my presence in the lane into which they are trying to occupy, in spite of the fact that I'm already there.

 

Now, if I blew the horn, continuously, the whole time I was riding it would be rude, inconsiderate and most likely in violation of some (maybe)noise ordinances. And I would be in the same category of those who ride bikes with loud pipes, rev them up at each stop light, whenever they cruise through residential neighborhoods or any other time they are trying to attract attention to themselves.

 

If you don't see the difference, then there is no need to have a further discussion and we will just agree to disagree.

 

my .02 Your mileage will vary.

 

I wasn't disagreeing, but i am not the person who might get nudged into being a hero to his constituents by proposing a loud horn ordinance. When I lived on the north side of Chicago years ago we liked to complain about the car alarms that got set off and interrupted our serenity. I just think it isn't a stretch to get from loud pipes to loud horns. Remember we (riders) are a small community and even though we think comparing loud pipes and loud horns is comparing apples and oranges, I'll bet there are more people who would put them in the same nuisance category.

 

We can get pretty parochial here!!

[Bill_Walker]

Subjective terms:

 

"about"

"a bit"

"much"

"hideously"

 

Objective term:

 

"80db at 25 ft"

 

It's all as simple as that. You're in compliance or your not. All the rest of the discussion is just attempts at self-justification.

 

I agree with your latter statement, but disagree with your standard. At what RPM and throttle opening, under what load, on how busy a street, with what precision of aiming, in what direction from the bike, etc., etc.? Measuring the actual level is a lot more complicated than it sounds. Backing up a subjective impression by checking for a label is really easy.

 

I've been around bikes with aftermarket pipes that were pretty quiet at idle, but when opened up could be loud enough to drown out conversation blocks away.

[Bud]

This is an honest question so don't think I am trying to tweak anyone. There is a thread on here about installing stiebel horns that produce a 135dB sound. I think I remember someone has actually installed two of these. Where does this fall in the "loud" debate? Is it okay for loud horns to save lives? Or do we need a definition that includes duration as well as loudness?

 

I have one of those horns on my bike and I'm not offended by your question.

 

My answer is that I only use the horn as a method to alert other drivers, for a very short period of time, of my presence in the lane into which they are trying to occupy, in spite of the fact that I'm already there.

 

Now, if I blew the horn, continuously, the whole time I was riding it would be rude, inconsiderate and most likely in violation of some (maybe)noise ordinances. And I would be in the same category of those who ride bikes with loud pipes, rev them up at each stop light, whenever they cruise through residential neighborhoods or any other time they are trying to attract attention to themselves.

 

If you don't see the difference, then there is no need to have a further discussion and we will just agree to disagree.

 

my .02 Your mileage will vary.

 

I wasn't disagreeing, but i am not the person who might get nudged into being a hero to his constituents by proposing a loud horn ordinance. When I lived on the north side of Chicago years ago we liked to complain about the car alarms that got set off and interrupted our serenity. I just think it isn't a stretch to get from loud pipes to loud horns. Remember we (riders) are a small community and even though we think comparing loud pipes and loud horns is comparing apples and oranges, I'll bet there are more people who would put them in the same nuisance category.

 

We can get pretty parochial here!!

 

 

No argument from me on that statement.

 

But even the AMA has seen the hand writing on the wall as far as noise and are trying to get their members to voluntarily curtail the loud pipes rather than face additional legislation.

 

I would only add that a loud bike, ridden on 10 miles of Denver streets, sure pisses off a lot more people than a loud horn, honked once, during the same ride. On that I think we both can agree.

[Ken H.]

but disagree with your standard.

Well of course I'm oversimplifying what constitutes an objective standard. But the point is that the determination of what is legal and what isn't has to be a standard, not personal opinions of what is or isn't "too" loud.

[russell_bynum]

Subjective terms:

 

"about"

"a bit"

"much"

"hideously"

 

Objective term:

 

"80db at 25 ft"

 

It's all as simple as that. You're in compliance or your not. All the rest of the discussion is just attempts at self-justification.

 

Ken, I have a feeling that this is futile considering your mindset on this. It is pretty much impossible to have a rational convesation with you about this issue because you feel so strongly about it. IMO, that's going to hurt your cause more than it is going to help it.

 

But.....

 

Subjective terms:

 

"about"

"a bit"

"much"

"hideously"

 

Correct.

 

Objective term:

 

"80db at 25 ft"

 

It's all as simple as that. You're in compliance or your not.

 

Correct. And correct me if I'm wrong, but even if you are in compliance with that rule (80db at 25ft), you're still breaking the law if you don't have the little stamp on your exhaust. Correct?

 

I don't know if Lisa's RS (With Remus with the pre-muffler and the silencer baffle) is within that or not because I haven't measured it objectively. I do know this: my ear (subjective, but capable of performing comparisions...for example...my ear tells me that a Marching Band at 25ft is louder than a conversationg at 25ft. I can tell that even though I didn't measure it with a sound meter.) tells me that her bike is not louder than quite a few other bikes with stock exhausts. If they're legal (within the 80db at 25ft limit), then hers would be as well. (Yes...I know...the pre-muffler replaces the catalytic converter, so we're still illegal. I'm just talking about noise.)

 

Except it wouldn't be legal because it doesn't have that little stamp on it. So...even though it is in line with the spirit of the law, it is in violation of the letter of the law.

 

BTW, I don't really care. I'm not planning on going to Denver any time soon, and I think this law is actually a fairly straightforward way of dealing with the problem. It doesn't work well for me personally, but it makes sense. I'm OK with that. I'm just pointing out that you don't have to be one of those "straight-pipe blip the throttle at the stoplights at 11pm and race off full throttle down the street setting off car alarms guys" to be in violation of this law. Even if your aftermarket exhaust is quieter than some bikes with stock (legal) exhausts, you are still in violation because you don't have the little stamp.

[JayW]

If you've been to Denver lately, you know they ought to target thier illegal alien population--THAT is the real problem there.

 

This is irrelevent to your premise. What does this subject have to do with loud pipes? If you want to discuss illegal aliens, then the subject should be introduced in the "Riders discuss other topics" forum.

 

Jay

[Mike]

And if you bought an expensive aftermarket pipe that was labeled "for off-road use only" and didn't check to see if it complied with EPA regulations?

 

My prediction: a new market for "Certified to Comply with EPA Vehicle Sound Standard X.XX"-type stickers.