Oregon and the Aftermarket -- scary!

Started by MotoCreations, February 06, 2009, 07:56:29 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

MendoDave

Quote from: herm on February 07, 2009, 06:42:40 AM
when?
how soon?
wanna buy a house? its really nice!

there was another monster rider there when i lived there.
or at least there was another monster. i never saw it out on the road...

im serious about the house...

Got a little place on Shasta Way & Gary St. that's paid for. But the House at the Running Y is going back to the bank. Its real nice, wanna Buy that?

Duck-Stew

Wait...  I've got one better for the CA crowd.

EPA testing of motorcycles is coming.  No shit.
Bike-less Portuguese immigrant enjoying life.

Popeye the Sailor

Quote from: Duck-Stew on February 07, 2009, 08:24:18 AM
Wait...  I've got one better for the CA crowd.

EPA testing of motorcycles is coming.  No shit.

The value of my stocker is skyrocketing!  ;D
If the state had not cut funding for the mental institutions, this project could never have happened.

Mother

Quote from: IZ on February 07, 2009, 08:10:51 AM
Remember those extreme "wheelie" laws that FL proposed and we thought they wouldn't happen? 





True

but

that is entirely different

that affected reckless drivers

This would impact entire industries, and during a time when the unemployment rate is up to 9% and we are losing some major employers in a few months

(Intel is closing shop)

Introducing a house bill that would shut down even more employers is beyond stupid


Statler

As far as I can tell, all the motor journal sites are adding words into this that aren't there.    This is the clause people are rightfully concerned about:

(d) Restrictions and prohibitions on the sale and distribution of after-market motor vehicle
parts, including but not limited to tires, if alternatives are available that decrease
greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles;


the bill would allow the Environmental Quality Commission to adopt rules to further the above.   So no specifics yet of how.

The first attack is to question what standard is used to show decrease in emissions...this is where the moto rags are saying rolling resistance etc....

But there have been no accepted tests showing any of this...so how does one show the 19 inch wheels on your BMW are worse for emissions than the 17s?  they don't...or it would be prohibitively expensive to show how each modification would actually effect emissions.    How would a state ever show your mud and snow tires cause your truck to emit more than stock tires?   And does it matter if you drive that truck 1,000 per year versus your neighbor who drives his f350 on stock tires 100,000 per year?

safety....   specific winter tires are very different than summer tires.   are seasons taken into account the state determines my aftermarket tire choices for my car?

enforcement... so who keeps the list of each and every OEM tire?   If a manufacturer specifies a variety of different tires for a car, are each of them considered stock?   



It's still buy a flounder a drink month

IZ

Quote from: Mother on February 07, 2009, 08:41:10 AM
True
but
that is entirely different
that affected reckless drivers
This would impact entire industries, and during a time when the unemployment rate is up to 9% and we are losing some major employers in a few months
(Intel is closing shop)
Introducing a house bill that would shut down even more employers is beyond stupid

yes, very different.  

just saying..we didn't thnk that would pass cuz it was too extreme and it did.  ^^^^ Very stupid!!  Hopefully this bill doesn't!!  

Portland is still on my lst of cities to live in!!  [thumbsup]
2018 Scrambler 800 "Argento"
2010 Monster 1100 "Niro" 
2003 Monster 620 "Scuro"



Quote from: bobspapa on May 29, 2011, 08:09:57 AMThis just in..IZ is not that short..and I am not that tall.

jdubbs32584

Quote from: Statler on February 07, 2009, 09:00:57 AM
As far as I can tell, all the motor journal sites are adding words into this that aren't there.    This is the clause people are rightfully concerned about:

(d) Restrictions and prohibitions on the sale and distribution of after-market motor vehicle
parts, including but not limited to tires, if alternatives are available that decrease
greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles;


the bill would allow the Environmental Quality Commission to adopt rules to further the above.   So no specifics yet of how.

The first attack is to question what standard is used to show decrease in emissions...this is where the moto rags are saying rolling resistance etc....

But there have been no accepted tests showing any of this...so how does one show the 19 inch wheels on your BMW are worse for emissions than the 17s?  they don't...or it would be prohibitively expensive to show how each modification would actually effect emissions.    How would a state ever show your mud and snow tires cause your truck to emit more than stock tires?   And does it matter if you drive that truck 1,000 per year versus your neighbor who drives his f350 on stock tires 100,000 per year?

safety....   specific winter tires are very different than summer tires.   are seasons taken into account the state determines my aftermarket tire choices for my car?

enforcement... so who keeps the list of each and every OEM tire?   If a manufacturer specifies a variety of different tires for a car, are each of them considered stock?   





Statler, thanks for posting this.

Mother, any idea who the reps are in our area?

Maybe one of the guys thats on the PNWRiders board can post it there too.

Mother

Quote from: Statler on February 07, 2009, 09:00:57 AM
As far as I can tell, all the motor journal sites are adding words into this that aren't there.    This is the clause people are rightfully concerned about:

(d) Restrictions and prohibitions on the sale and distribution of after-market motor vehicle
parts, including but not limited to tires, if alternatives are available that decrease
greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles;


the bill would allow the Environmental Quality Commission to adopt rules to further the above.   So no specifics yet of how.

The first attack is to question what standard is used to show decrease in emissions...this is where the moto rags are saying rolling resistance etc....

But there have been no accepted tests showing any of this...so how does one show the 19 inch wheels on your BMW are worse for emissions than the 17s?  they don't...or it would be prohibitively expensive to show how each modification would actually effect emissions.    How would a state ever show your mud and snow tires cause your truck to emit more than stock tires?   And does it matter if you drive that truck 1,000 per year versus your neighbor who drives his f350 on stock tires 100,000 per year?

safety....   specific winter tires are very different than summer tires.   are seasons taken into account the state determines my aftermarket tire choices for my car?

enforcement... so who keeps the list of each and every OEM tire?   If a manufacturer specifies a variety of different tires for a car, are each of them considered stock?   






(b) May differentiate between different areas of the state, different greenhouse gases and
different categories of substances, fuels, motor vehicles or other equipment or activities that
contribute directly or indirectly to greenhouse gas emissions.



This is what concerns me more than the possibility that they will make me get rid of my 35" tires

This gives them the power to shut down Motorized activities

Racing and OHV specifically

and

that will kill entire industries



Statler

I skipped right over that paragraph in looking for what the moto-rags were saying.


Time to get bigger badder lawyers involved.  There's going to be an issue about rulemaking/lawmaking powers of unelected officials granted if this passes.
It's still buy a flounder a drink month

Kopfjäger

Woohoohoohoo! Two personal records! For breath holding and number of sharks shot in the face.

MotoCreations

Stuart -- Arizona has emissions testing for motorcycles in Phoenix (and Tucson still?).  Nothing fun about getting a hopped up Ducati to try and pass with FCR's, camshaft and wild exhausts.

Oregon?  Not bashing Oregon at all.  Stunningly beautiful place -- I've lived in Corvallis and Ashland/Medford before.  Even seriously looked at going back to Ashland or over into the Bend area a few times the past seven years.  One day perhaps?  So not being a resident currently, thus the post:  how to make the folks in Oregon aware their voices need to be heard to make sure some silly little bureacrat doesn't ruin it all for them.  I know a LOT of aftermarket manufacturers in Oregon and making them aware as well -- it does affect their business ventures and their ability to develop/testing of new products as well.  Problem is that if one state adopts this kind of rules -- what is to prevent another one somewhere else?

squidwood

this is not going to pass.It won't stand a chance in the state senate, due to the overwhelming number of people in the State of Oregon who are avid outdoorsmen/women.
I for one cannot see that a comapny such as Warn Industries on Capps Road in Clackamas or their hub division on Pheasant Court in Milwaukie would just sit idly by and allow this to happen
.Winches and hubs are aftermarket parts.
Then there is the question of every car dealer,motorcycle dealer, truck dealer etc that sells aftermarket parts.
You think that Les Scwab Tires is going to kiss off their shitty suspension packages? Not very likely.
You think that Fred Meyer is going to stop carrying sylvania light bulbs to fit every car made.....thats aftermarket.
Oregon's economy is in the toilet thanks to Messrs Bush and Cheney, they are not going to cause further financial hardship for the state with a bill like this that would cause another 10-20,000 people statewide to join the unemployment lines.
This bill won't go anywhere,mark my words
Get involved if you want to stop it.

cloud2blue


"Authorizes Environmental Quality Commission to adopt rules to help state to achieve
greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals. Specifies rules that commission may adopt."

One thing I think is being missed, is that this Act is NOT banning aftermarket parts or tires. It is giving the power to control them to the Commission IF said part effects "Greenhouse Gas Emissions." What the Commission does with that power is another thing. I feel the important question is how will the Commission will quantify "Greenhouse Gas Emissions."

If the Commission were to ban a tire, they would have to show that tire increases "Greenhouse Gas Emissions" when compared to the OEM tire. The tire's manufacture would contest the findings and lock it up in court for decades.

Since track bikes are technically not "Motor Vehicles," the most the Commission could do is effect race fuel. And since a track is private property the most they could do is require the track to get a permit same as any other business that emits greenhouse gases.

Governor: Ted Kulongoski

Speaker of the House: Dave Hunt

Environmental Quality Commission


MendoDave

Quote from: Mother on February 07, 2009, 08:41:10 AM


Introducing a house bill that would shut down even more employers is beyond stupid



That's exactly what they will do then!

Statler

#29
can we please keep this thread to discussing arguments to use for Oregonians (?) to discuss with their legislators and not 'yeah that's dumb' comments and + 1s.  Of course it's stupid and not thought through in all aspects...I bet 3850 of the 3853 members here agree with that.   So let's work out a solution.

It's still buy a flounder a drink month