Jump to content
IGNORED

Boycott Denver


gasser

Recommended Posts

Jim VonBaden
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. eek.gif

 

As it stands most aftermarket motorcycle pipes are already illegal, and have been for many years.

 

IF you buy an illegal pipe, no matter how quiet, you should expect to get a ticket if a cop checks. It is a simple as that.

 

Take the loud part out and it is STILL illegal to have most aftermarket pipes. The EPA does not allow modifications to the exhaust unless the modification has been approved. Almost NONE of the aftermarket, and some factory non-stock pipe kits, are approved for use on any bike used on the road.

 

Therefore, this new law, is nothing but a way of enforcing the old ones.

 

As for loud stereos in cars, I find them just as annoying as loud pipes.

 

Jim cool.gif

Link to comment

Just curious... are the bikes built on Discovery's American Chopper and by other custom shops required to be EPA compliant for noise and do they get a sticker? Or do they all just get a pass?

Link to comment
Jim VonBaden
Just curious... are the bikes built on Discovery's American Chopper and by other custom shops required to be EPA compliant for noise and do they get a sticker? Or do they all just get a pass?

 

They are as illegal as Jesse James bikes are. Just no one is enforcing the laws!

 

Jim cool.gif

Link to comment

Those of us here on BMWST.com clearly worship at the altar of quiet pipes, but there is something that bears mentioning: as bikes get older, it becomes increasingly difficult to locate and buy factory exhausts. The enforcement of standards like Denver's could have the effect of sidelining older motorcycles, for which factory-certified exhausts may no longer be available. This was actually one of the AMA's criticisms of the Denver ordinance.

Link to comment
Just curious... are the bikes built on Discovery's American Chopper and by other custom shops required to be EPA compliant for noise and do they get a sticker? Or do they all just get a pass?

 

There are passes given to "Kit" motorcycles for emmissions...Can build one bike per lifetime for an individual and it can't be sold for 5 years.... A custom builder can build up to 24 bikes a year....

Can't find anything yet about penalties for not meeting EPA noise levels....... confused.gif

 

Found some info about motorcycle noise level enforcement in Australia Here

 

Laguna Beach police department hired a retired Marine who, armed with a decimeter, issues tickets to noisy vehicles...Probably 90% bikes..It's his only duty....Word's around so I don't think a lot of straight-pipers visit there anymore...

 

Phil.........Redbrick

Link to comment

It seems to me that a cop is only going to bother pulling over a bike that is objectionably noisy to check for a sticker, not a bike with aftermarket quiet pipes that are not OEM. Of course, that requires trusting the discretion of the cops. I do generally, but some don't just out of libertarian concerns. Flakey laws shouldn't be written in the first place.

 

I suppose if you're on an old bike that you can't get OEM pipes for (but the replacements you have are quiet but have no sticker), you can always tell that to the judge, but that requires judicial discretion.

Link to comment
Jim VonBaden
Those of us here on BMWST.com clearly worship at the altar of quiet pipes, but there is something that bears mentioning: as bikes get older, it becomes increasingly difficult to locate and buy factory exhausts. The enforcement of standards like Denver's could have the effect of sidelining older motorcycles, for which factory-certified exhausts may no longer be available. This was actually one of the AMA's criticisms of the Denver ordinance.

 

That can definitely be an issue, but it should be on the manufacturer to get certified, and for replacement style pipes that do not increase the moise, or emmisions now that many bikes have cats, it should be fairly simple. The auto industry has been doing it for many years. You can by legal aftermarket anything for automobiles these days. Motorcycle parts manufacturers need to step up and do the same.

 

Jim cool.gif

Link to comment
Those of us here on BMWST.com clearly worship at the altar of quiet pipes, but there is something that bears mentioning: as bikes get older, it becomes increasingly difficult to locate and buy factory exhausts. The enforcement of standards like Denver's could have the effect of sidelining older motorcycles, for which factory-certified exhausts may no longer be available. This was actually one of the AMA's criticisms of the Denver ordinance.

 

All of the big aftermarket exhaust makers make systems certified to European noise standards and mark them as such. This includes the Remus system with pre-muffler and baffle. The Euro standard is also a 80dB drive-by test and so the only effort to the manufacturers should be the paperwork to prove compliance.

 

FWIW, the biggest problem to bike makers is the mechanical noise from pistons, chains, tyres etc. They can easily silence intake and exhaust sytems but withouth the metal cage around the mechanical parts the other issues become problematic. This is part of the reason for oil-cooling the heads on our bikes - it helps keep the noise in.

 

Andy

Link to comment

I'm all for Denver's efforts to stifle the noise, but I'm curious, what's this EPA "sticker" people have mentioned? Do all new road bikes sold in the US have them on the exhaust when delivered to the first customer?

 

I'll be in Denver this summer, and if the law's in effect by then, I don't anticipate any problems with my RT even if, given it's a Canadian bike, it has no EPA sticker. grin.gif

Link to comment
russell_bynum

All of the big aftermarket exhaust makers make systems certified to European noise standards and mark them as such. This includes the Remus system with pre-muffler and baffle. The Euro standard is also a 80dB drive-by test and so the only effort to the manufacturers should be the paperwork to prove compliance.

 

That would be true for the noise aspect. The stock (US) exhausts also have a catalytic converter, which the Remus pre-muffler does not have.

 

There's no reason they couldn't offer a pre-muffler with a high-flow catalyst in it, but the current system as it exists today probably would not be kosher.

Link to comment
I'm all for Denver's efforts to stifle the noise, but I'm curious, what's this EPA sticker? Do all new road bikes have them on the exhaust when delivered to the first customer?
It's not a sticker (which wouldn't last long on an exhaust system) but rather a statement stamped into the exhaust. It is present on virtually all OEM systems (on my RT it's a whole freakin' paragraph grin.gif) but not as commonly on aftermarket systems, either by simple omission (in the past no one really cared about it) or because the product doesn't meet the standard. As more and more of these regulations become common I'm sure the markings will also become common, as will be the manufacturer's incentive to comply with noise limitations.
Link to comment
The stock (US) exhausts also have a catalytic converter, which the Remus pre-muffler does not have.

Question: while looking at the Remus page for RT stuff, the third, fourth, and fifth listing on the page lists "pre-silencer incl. cat.".

 

Is this an aftermarket exhaust system being offered with a catalytic converter???

 

Note: further down is stuff that says "pre-silencer without cat.", so....whaddya think the scoop is here?

Link to comment
russell_bynum

Hey, that's cool. If they're now offering the system with the cat, there's probably no reason why it shouldn't be able to be certified.

 

(And I wonder if I can replace the cat-less pre-muffler on Lisa' bike with one with a cat?)

Link to comment

I've been following these threads with some interest since it echoes the same discussion here in Denver (less of course the Bronco football angle, David).

 

As a general remark Tom, I find it interesting you should know so much about the details of Denver's problems (especially the illegal alien issue) living so closely in St. Louis. But I'll leave that topic for another time (a topic like that will surely be locked on this board). Should you decide to avoid Denver because of your perception that your absence would leave some financial heartache here,... go for it. I'm afraid it'll be your loss, and not ours.

 

Folks should first understand the genesis of this problem. It was rooted in a small neighborhood in Denver where residents were constantly besieged with loud cruiser pipes at all hours of the day (and night). They did what any one of us would have done and went to their local city councilman and tried to have enforced laws to subvert this offensive noise. City Council went about coming up with the most (to them) cost effective means to arm patrol officers with a way to enforce the new city law (for the record, its Denver not all of Colorado). For Denver it was not cost effective to provide EVERY patrol car with sound measuring equipment and train every officer how to use it and subsequently be challenged in court on their effectiveness. Remember...this was ONE small enclave that caught the attention of their representative. The classic squeaky wheel.

 

Gleno used to say "You guys will analyze a haircut!". What I believe is that folks are reading FAR more into this (thanks to the press, radio talk shows, internet) than is warranted. While there may be instances where someone is justifiably or not ticketed for loud pipes, I believe as a general rule, patrol officers aren't looking to single out motorcyclists as they're riding through our city examining little stickers on the exhaust (82db, 90db? "You guys will analyze a haircut.")

 

I would hope, Tom, that you have far more important issues to take up with other municipalities than a loud pipe ordinance or illegal aliens that would justify boycotting our wonderful city and state.

 

Mike O

Link to comment
russell_bynum

Gleno used to say "You guys will analyze a haircut!". What I believe is that folks are reading FAR more into this (thanks to the press, radio talk shows, internet) than is warranted. While there may be instances where someone is justifiably or not ticketed for loud pipes, I believe as a general rule, patrol officers aren't looking to single out motorcyclists as they're riding through our city examining little stickers on the exhaust (82db, 90db? "You guys will analyze a haircut.")

 

Indeed.

 

But...it is interesting because the noise issue is one that we are fighting in many places across the country. If Denver comes up with a solution that fixes the problem (people being annoyed by overly loud motorcycles) while still allowing the rider some leeway to customize the sound and look of their bike (which this might...if the aftermarket companies start making stuff with the magic stamp on it), then that's a pretty good compromise.

 

So...for me, it isn't "What's going on in Denver" that I'm interested in. It is "How is this group going about solving the problem and how could that be adapted to my community?"

 

In short....yes...we would analyze a haircut. smile.gif

Link to comment
AdventurePoser

I guess I'll weigh in...when I think of the nice curbside cafes that J and I love to visit, that we don't anymore because of the continual roar of unmuffled bikes, I feel angry.

 

Sometimes the sound is so loud that it physically hurts...what could be the benefit to that??

 

I'm with Denver on this one.

 

Steve

Link to comment

I am hopeful that the law will be used to ticket the folks who are actively annoying others - the throttle jockey at the light, or the guys who have to rev up the bike for 10 minutes outside the resturaunt before they pull away. These guys are easy to locate because they are trying to draw attention to themselves.

 

I hope it is not used to ticket anyone and everyone with aftermarket pipes irregardless if they are loud or not. As in - an officer goes to a local biker hangout and starts putting tickets on parked bikes with aftermarket exhaust. My R had a remus slip on with the cat still on, and I seriously doubt it would have exceeded the legal noise limit. However, with no stamp it could be ticketed.

 

As a comparison - technically, bringing beer into a state park is illegal here. However, I have never seen anyone actually get a ticket unless they were causing problems. If you are causing a problem the "no beer" law gives the warden an iron clad excuse to ticket you and kick you out of the park.

 

Mike

Link to comment

Ken

Sound metering is not as simple as 80db at 25 feet. As someone who raced cars with sound limit rules, we found that there are many variables to deal with. One of those is the humitity. The wetter the air, the more sound carries. Your bike may be legal on one day and over the limit another day, determined by the humitity. Would the LEO's calibrate for the humitity everytime they turn on their meter? Would they always be the perfect 25 feet distance from the mufflers? I'm thinking that metering the sound would not be a very good process for determining compliance with the sound laws. I think that lawyers will tear these ticket cases apart in the courts. I think the only way this issue can be enforced is to verify the exhaust meets the manufacturers specifications and is in good operating condition.

Link to comment
russell_bynum

I think the only way this issue can be enforced is to verify the exhaust meets the manufacturers specifications and is in good operating condition.

 

And you think that would be easier to enforce???

 

1. What are the original manufacturer's specifications? (Are cops gonna carry around a book with that info for every make/model/year bike ever made?)

2. How do you know it is in good working order?

 

Compared to having to enforce those standards, teaching all the cops how to use and calibrate sound meters would be a snap.

Link to comment

I am trying to remember where I read this; it might have been in this forum: The story was told of a young man filling his bike at a gas station, maybe in Chicago. LEO walks over, examines the exhaust, determines that it is not legal, and issues a ticket. The author of the tale, IIRC, had a "cop was picking on us" attitude. Anybody remember this?

 

I ask because Husker's hopes are unlikely to be fulfilled.

Link to comment
....... Do all new road bikes sold in the US have them on the exhaust when delivered to the first customer?

 

I'll be in Denver this summer, and if the law's in effect by then, I don't anticipate any problems with my RT even if, given it's a Canadian bike, it has no EPA sticker. grin.gif

 

Not a "sticker" but stamped into the muffler...On my '05 RT it's on the inside next to the wheel...Can't see it except from the right side of the bike...

 

Phil.........Redbrick

Link to comment
Rocket_Cowboy
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.

 

Pass a horn ban, and I'll gladly pay if I get cited for having beeping a loud horn while being run over by an inattentive driver.

 

Likewise, those who've added illegal pipes to their bikes for the purpose of being heard should be glad to pay the citation ... they got heard. They knew it was illegal when they added the pipes, these laws declaring the pipes illegal aren't new laws, just the method of enforcement is. Those riders made the risk analysis and decided they were willing to take the risk that they'd get caught. Not just that, most flaunt that they have louder pipes than stock because they want the attention.

 

Exhaust systems are not legally recognized as a safety device while horns, lights, and turn signals are. There's the difference in the analogy, IMO.

Link to comment

We recently had a pursuit of some motorcyclist here in the suburbs of Washington DC on the Capital Beltway where some squids were travelling at a high rate of speed, lane splitting and doing wheelies prior to rush hour. A police officer begain pursuing the offenders and a high speed chase insued. The pursuing officer lost control of his vehicle and ended up rear ending another vehicle knocking it off an over pass and down onto other traffic. 15 people were injured and 3 people died. That whole next day all the talk radio shows were talking about was should these bikes be allowed on the road. My point is that the media and some very narrow minded people tend to blame the problem of a few squids on the whole motorcycle community and motorcycles in general. I ride a Harley and a BMW but when I am on the Harley and I go by a person walking or riding a horse I do not rev the engine. I do agree that the city if Denver has the right to enforce this type of ordinance but we also need to speak up and let these same city officials know that not all bikers have loud pipes. I do not like being lumped in with that crowd. I have a R1 but I ride it with respect. Every time we let city officials take a small liberty away from us it makes it easier to take larger things away. IMHO

Link to comment
Rocket_Cowboy
15 people were killed and 3 people died.

 

How does that work? 12 people were killed but didn't die?

 

Every time we let city officials take a small liberty away from us it makes it easier to take larger things away.

 

The counterpoint to that is that when citizens purposely deviate from the law (by installing exhausts marked as off road or competition/show use only ... knowing they aren't street legal), they make it easier for officials to take away more liberties.

Link to comment

Mike

Thanks for the clarification on the cause. Good info. Actually, I know about Denver first-hand since I travel there on business often. My point was and still is: If government, large or small, arbitrarily regulates sound levels, what's next? Are 18 wheelers allowed to use their engine brakes in this part of town? Are there cops who are deployed to ticket boom boxes? What happens when a cop decides the color of your rat bike if offensive to the eye? At what time of day do they begin to enforce noise polluters that have parties and the music is too loud. Are loud pipes an issue? Sure.

Besides, are you saying you don't have a problem with illegals in Denver?

Link to comment
Lets_Play_Two

"Exhaust systems are not legally recognized as a safety device while horns, lights, and turn signals are. There's the difference in the analogy, IMO."

 

I'm not arguing with you I'm just asking questions. I do however think you ignore my point. Someone just posted that the Denver issue came up because a small group of people complained and the squeeky wheel got greased. IMHO, you put your head in the sand when you try to find reasons why loud horns might not be an issue.

 

Question: Are horns required on motorcycles?

Link to comment

Ken

Sound metering is not as simple as 80db at 25 feet. As someone who raced cars with sound limit rules, we found that there are many variables to deal with. One of those is the humitity.

Yes I know, and I wasn't trying to define a whole standard in a sentence, only trying to make a point between the value of a standard vs. an opinion of what is too loud and what isn't.

 

Like you say sound metering is easy to tear apart in court. Just this simple question, "Mr. Officer, can you prove that all the sound the meter recorded came from the motorcycle in question?" is enough to get the ticket thrown out. So I think what Denver has done (and other's who have taken this approach) is the next best thing. It's definable - the pipes have to be EPA noise emissions certified, it's verifiable - was the pipe on the bike certified or not? And it's enforceable.

 

I do feel bad for the people who have non-certified pipes on a bike that truly conforms with all noise emissions standards (if such a thing exist), but not bad enough that the very privilege to ride a motorcycle in some areas should be sacrificed for them.

 

Someone mentioned in the other thread that they think existing bikes should be grandfathered in, which is ridiculous. It would accomplish nothing. The noisy bikes would all still be out there making noise. But I could see the value of a program where you could voluntarily submit your bike to sound level testing under a controlled situation, then if it passed be granted an exception from the requirement that your specific pipes approved in the testing have to have the EPA metal stamping.

Link to comment

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.
True, but the law, any law is as much about being enforceable asit is about being fair. Because enforceability begets fairness. And on the street sound metering isn't enforceable.

 

So, if there was a provision (I know there isn't, buy hypothetically) where you could voluntarily submit your bike to sound level testing under a controlled situation, then if it passed be granted an exception from the requirement that your specific pipes approved in the testing have to have the EPA metal stamping, would that be acceptable to you?

 

I mean, it seems to me that would meet all the objectives of both sides of the argument. I.e. - 'Put your pipes where your mouth is' so to speak.

Link to comment
russell_bynum

Like you say sound metering is easy to tear apart in court. Just this simple question, "Mr. Officer, can you prove that all the sound the meter recorded came from the motorcycle in question?" is enough to get the ticket thrown out. So I think what Denver has done (and other's who have taken this approach) is the next best thing. It's definable - the pipes have to be EPA noise emissions certified, it's verifiable - was the pipe on the bike certified or not? And it's enforceable

 

I agree.

 

Except...Using Andy's information, there's no reason to assume that a Remus exhaust with a catalytic converter and the silencer baffle installed would not meet the EPA standard. And Remus could get it certified and stamped. And I could install it on my BMW and be legal.

 

Then I remove the baffle. And replace the cat with a hollow pre-muffler (or even a straight pipe).

 

I'm making more noise than is allowed by the regs, but I've got the stamp. Are cops expected to know the nuances of every exhaust for every bike?

 

Definitely I agree with you...this is probably the most straightforward, simple way to enforce the noise regs. LEO's don't have to carry around sound meters and learn how to use them. If a bike gets their attenion, they look for the stamp. If it isn't there, they issue a ticket. Simple.

 

I can definitely see how people could get around the law, but I think this is still probably the easiest way to enforce it.

 

But I could see the value of a program where you could voluntarily submit your bike to sound level testing under a controlled situation, then if it passed be granted an exception from the requirement that your specific pipes approved in the testing have to have the EPA metal stamping.

 

That seems fair. (BTW, Lisa's RS would probably pass that test. My Tuono and DRZ probably wouldn't.)

Link to comment

Our town of 100K people has a noise ordinance that covers it all. If you are making enough noise to bother someone day or night, you are in violation. This does not mean you will be ticketed, but it is a posibility. The cops will use their discretion and probably give you a warning for a first offence if they find you are indeed too noisy. Of course fines can be levied and you can always have your day in court if you think you were wronged. In our town if you act like an a-hole you will be treated like an a-hole. Here's a big thumbsup.gifto Denver, I look forward to visiting soon! clap.gif

Link to comment
Rocket_Cowboy
I'm not arguing with you I'm just asking questions. I do however think you ignore my point. Someone just posted that the Denver issue came up because a small group of people complained and the squeeky wheel got greased. IMHO, you put your head in the sand when you try to find reasons why loud horns might not be an issue.

 

Question: Are horns required on motorcycles?

 

Are horns required on motorcycles? At least here in Texas, horns are required in order to pass inspection.

 

I don't think I dodged your point at all. If there was a noise limit in effect for horns, I would either comply with the ordinance, or I would live with the fine if caught. Unlike the exhaust system, the only way anyone is going to know whether my horn is in compliance or not is if/when I activate it ... and that's only going to be when I immediately need to get someone's attention because they are violating my right-of-way.

 

In the case of Denver, a few people have complained because a few riders are in violation of existing noise laws by intentionally installing equipment explicitly labeled that it is not legal for street use. The response was not to enact new noise laws, but to enforce the existing EPA law that's been on the books for years.

 

So my question back ... why would someone who knowingly makes an illegal modification to their motorcycle then be surprised/alarmed/outraged when they are cited for that same modification?

Link to comment
Rocket_Cowboy
So, if there was a provision (I know there isn't, buy hypothetically) where you could voluntarily submit your bike to sound level testing under a controlled situation, then if it passed be granted an exception from the requirement that your specific pipes approved in the testing have to have the EPA metal stamping, would that be acceptable to you?

 

Having the end user submit their "system" for certification rather than having the manufacturer do so would be acceptable to me ... assuming that the cost of acquiring said certification was reasonable.

 

The FCC uses similar rules for EIRP certifications for WiFi (and possibly other frequency) equipment. The manufacturer will certify their radios with their antennas, and then other integrators will certify a radio combination with 3rd party antenna options as needed.

Link to comment
Lets_Play_Two

"So my question back ... why would someone who knowingly makes an illegal modification to their motorcycle then be surprised/alarmed/outraged when they are cited for that same modification?"

 

I can't answer for anyone else, but if I were to have an illegal exhaust I would pay the fine just as I would pay the fine were I ever to break the speed limit and get stopped.

grin.gif

Link to comment

Related question to you LEO's out there...Can a municipality enforce federal EPA laws?... Fines set by law or judge make the decision?....How does all that work? confused.gif

 

Phil......Redbrick

Link to comment
Can a municipality enforce federal EPA laws?...
I'm not an LEO, and I didn't sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but I believe that is the core reason why Denver passed their own ordinance. Which they of course can enforce. It's just modeled after the EPA regs.
Link to comment

I suppose it meets the bike manufacturers specifications when it is stamped with the bike manufacturers name and EPA certification numbers.

 

Working order would be, you didn't gut the muffler or it isn't rusted through. Same as what we deal with on our cars.

 

Back to the boycott idea, I would think the boycott is in order if they only enforced the sound levels on motorcycles and not cars and pickups. There are quite a few riceburner cars out there with loud mufflers and what really seems to be the fad now days are these diesel pickups with big inch pipes and little to no muffler. Besides loud, these diesels sound like crap. If Denver wants to police noise makers, enforce it across the board. It wouldn't be fair to single out only the motorcycles.

I think noise pollution is a ligitimate concern and the cities have a right to address it, as long as it does not discriminate against any one sector of the population.

Link to comment

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

 

+1 thumbsup.gifthumbsup.gifthumbsup.gifthumbsup.gif

 

We're going for the Cherry Creek Arts Festival.

 

If I'da wanted noise, I'da got a Harley.

Link to comment
Mike

Thanks for the clarification on the cause. Good info. Actually, I know about Denver first-hand since I travel there on business often. My point was and still is: If government, large or small, arbitrarily regulates sound levels, what's next? Are 18 wheelers allowed to use their engine brakes in this part of town? Are there cops who are deployed to ticket boom boxes? What happens when a cop decides the color of your rat bike if offensive to the eye? At what time of day do they begin to enforce noise polluters that have parties and the music is too loud. Are loud pipes an issue? Sure.

Besides, are you saying you don't have a problem with illegals in Denver?

Tom, it's really not that complicated. If you really spent much time in Denver you'd know there are A LOT of cruisers and MANY of 'em are running straight pipes. Thus there's a problem for those of us who don't want our ears assulted by passing bikes. My only complaint would be if the ordinance only addressed MC's and not ALL vehicles - we've also got plenty of cages without proper mufflers...

 

I'm just surprised and disappointed that this new law hasn't been painted as yet another example of LEO's being used to enrich the city of Denver! lmao.giflmao.giflmao.gif

Link to comment

Let's make it a national ban!! Don't know what the official name is but while we're at it can we also outlaw these frickin; I call em boom box cars!!! I do not want to listen to that crap!!!!!!!! I can't have a smoke in a building now why do I have to listen to that crap???? Surley I may end up hearing challenged having to listen to second hand crap!!!!! Please do not share it with me. If you want to end up deaf and dumb that's your business.

 

I swear the next car that pulls up next to me spewing that crap I will put the driver in a room and make him listen to hours of The Allman Brothers At The Fillmore East!!! On second thought that's to good for him. I know, Inagaddavida!!!!!!

 

 

 

ISYHTRAH and listen to that crap!!!!

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

"Real Problem" for whom? You?

Link to comment

Wow... you guys sure can meander...

 

I'd say the only proper means of enforcing this is controlled testing. If a LEO suspects your exhaust is too loud you get a repair ticket - you must appear at the test facility within (say) 4 days to have the motorcycle sound tested; a mark on the exhaust by the officer could insure against switching pipes, failure to appear at the facility gets an automatic ticket and additional repair order.

 

A facility in town someplace where you ride to be tested... No questions - you pass and ride or fail and have X days to be retested to pass again.

 

 

 

I wonder if Ducatis can be exempted? I bought a bike with aftermarket Remus cans on it. I wouldn't have spent the money, but it was there, and I similarly don't want to spend $$$ to buy a stock exhaust, either. I can't hear my exhaust - you know, the whole Doppler thing - so I don't care how it sounds, but I worry constantly if I'm being too loud in towns/neighborhoods, etc... my wife assures me it's not obnoxious at all - just a deep thrumming sound, entirely different from neighbor John's instant-irritation Hardley with straight pipes.

 

I get compliments on my exhaust - I only wish I knew what it sounded like. I think giving LEOs the right to require testing is better than any toggle switch ticket regarding stamps (since many old exhausts aren't stamped, but might be legal) or roadside uncontrolled testing.

 

80 dB pass or fail, controlled test facility like we have for emissions already. That's the most concrete, simple, and objective means possible to test for compliance with a well-intended law.

 

Oh, and my Remus never had baffles, and the bike never had a cat, only a pre-mufler, which I won't remove anyway though it weighs a ton and looks like crap.

Link to comment
russell_bynum

a mark on the exhaust by the officer could insure against switching pipes

 

No way in hell I'm letting someone vandalize my motorcycle.

Link to comment
a mark on the exhaust by the officer could insure against switching pipes

 

No way in hell I'm letting someone vandalize my motorcycle.

No kidding - that would never work.

 

We have noise laws, why not just make it a priority to ticket the worst offenders? Motorcycle exhausts, car exhausts, booming audio systems.

Link to comment

Seriously? OK. confused.gif

 

The whole point of this is to objectively ticket the obnoxious pipes... making it a priority to "ticket the 'worst' offenders" would be a legal migraine if it wasn't more specific and objective. I wouldn't raise an eyebrow if the law was to enable LEOs to cause testing for exhausts which "seemed" too loud. Not ticket based on "seemed" but cause testing for them... then the testing facility can be as objective as possible. Fail, you get ticketed and must be re-tested after fixing the noise issue; pass, and you've got papers for that exhaust/bike allowing you to quickly avoid tickets or anything in the future.

Link to comment

THIS ENGINEERING SYMPOSIUM ON NOISE IS BULL!

 

Sorry guys, I blew the baffles out of my keyboard. How about a little intellectual honesty on this thread. This noise thing is about one thing--Harleys and straight pipes. We can dance around this with vague references to Remus, 18 wheelers' engine brakes, loud music, etc. Bottomline is that this community doesn't want loud Harley's and the perceived "cycle trash" that ride them. Let's call a spade a spade. Now that I got that out of my crawl...

In the old days, cops used to carry a rod to run up the a$$ end of a tail pipe. If it went in too far, you got a ticket. The hypocicy of the Denver community leaders on this is what really ticks me off: Just north of Denver, in Ft. Collins, is the largest custom manufacturer of HD bikes in the world--1400 units per year in addition to their factory-made bikes. Thunder Mountain ain't putting factory exhausts on these bikes. (I guarantee the BMW dealer just around the corner from Thunder Mountain doesn't sell a tenth of that.) So, the Denver community is saying, "You can buy your loud-a$$ bikes in our area--you just can't ride them here." This is bull.

And for all of you anal-retentive types that feel compelled to point out the mileage between Denver and Fort Collins, save your energy. The Denver community as a whole benefits from these manufactured bikes. Period. smirk.gif

Link to comment
THIS ENGINEERING SYMPOSIUM ON NOISE IS BULL!

 

Sorry guys, I blew the baffles out of my keyboard. How about a little intellectual honesty on this thread. This noise thing is about one thing--Harleys and straight pipes. We can dance around this with vague references to Remus, 18 wheelers' engine brakes, loud music, etc. Bottomline is that this community doesn't want loud Harley's and the perceived "cycle trash" that ride them. Let's call a spade a spade. Now that I got that out of my crawl...

In the old days, cops used to carry a rod to run up the a$$ end of a tail pipe. If it went in too far, you got a ticket. The hypocicy of the Denver community leaders on this is what really ticks me off: Just north of Denver, in Ft. Collins, is the largest custom manufacturer of HD bikes in the world--1400 units per year in addition to their factory-made bikes. Thunder Mountain ain't putting factory exhausts on these bikes. (I guarantee the BMW dealer just around the corner from Thunder Mountain doesn't sell a tenth of that.) So, the Denver community is saying, "You can buy your loud-a$$ bikes in our area--you just can't ride them here." This is bull.

And for all of you anal-retentive types that feel compelled to point out the mileage between Denver and Fort Collins, save your energy. The Denver community as a whole benefits from these manufactured bikes. Period. smirk.gif

 

confused.gif

Link to comment
This noise thing is about one thing--Harleys and straight pipes.
And where in the ordinance did you come to that conclusion? This noise thing is about one thing--loud motorcycles, regardless of brand. There are loud BMWs, Hondas, Kaw's, ___________. If the actions were prejudiced against one brand, even I might be bent about it!
Link to comment

Tom, your starting to bore me. tongue.gif Your enthusiasm for this is only outdone by your Rube Goldbergesque approach to discourse. Can you ease up on the meds and then take another swing at this?

Link to comment
THIS ENGINEERING SYMPOSIUM ON NOISE IS BULL!

 

Sorry guys, I blew the baffles out of my keyboard. How about a little intellectual honesty on this thread.

 

lurker.gif

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...