Cali motorcycle smog tests ...looks like they are really trying to do this

[Duck-Stew]

: [rise to feet spilling beer]

Thanks.     My letter is being crafted and I'll post up a copy when I'm done with it (likely this weekend).

[Greg]

Ok...  I've got a few things to say on this:  [steps onto platform]

1)  Known fact:  ONE cargo container ship pulls into and out of Long Beach port.  It's emissions are equal to ALL cars in the greater LA area for one entire day.  But, no one taxes or certifies that vehicle (and they pour the sewage tanks into the fuel tank...think about that when you're breathing in LA!)

Known fact? Please back those facts up with sources, I'd be curious to see the actual numbers, and yes I"m sceptical of your claim.

2: Motorcycles need to be light. They also need to be efficient. Current electronically controlled ignition systems are highly efficient. I have not seen any study reports to base any findings of the validity of the need for extra smog control equipment on these vehicles.

I don't think the law is trying to install EXTRA smog equipment, it is trying to stop you from bypassing the equipment that came on the bike, say like uhhh... putting on termi's and using the DP ECU, and also removing the carbon canister.

I do agree that it is going to cost us all money.

[sbrguy]

its none of those thing.

1. in general the public hates motorcycles on roads, why? because they are not cars.

2. in general the public hates bicyclist on roads, why ? because they are not cars.

3. politicians pander to the public, meaning they will do anything to get cars and cyclists off the road.

this law is for one reason people in general don't like motorcycles, they are too loud, too annoying on the roads, etc.. they can't openly say "outlaw them" because that would be too much against harley davidson an american thing, so instead thsi is a backdoor way of saying "get off my roads" there is no other reason for the retroactive part of the law except to say , "sorry you cant' use that anymore it doesn't pass, stick to driving your car'

they can say "oh i'm not against motorcycles" if they are they are lying, then why make the law retroactive all the way to 2000?, usually laws are never retro active past the date they are enacted.

motorcyclists are such a small minority of motorists that if they were to go away, the general public would not give 2 sh%ts about it.. simple as that.

[red baron]

time to buy up pre-2000 bikes.

[zLoki]

its none of those thing.

1. in general the public hates motorcycles on roads, why? because they are not cars.

2. in general the public hates bicyclist on roads, why ? because they are not cars.

3. politicians pander to the public, meaning they will do anything to get cars and cyclists off the road.

this law is for one reason people in general don't like motorcycles, they are too loud, too annoying on the roads, etc.. they can't openly say "outlaw them" because that would be too much against harley davidson an american thing, so instead thsi is a backdoor way of saying "get off my roads" there is no other reason for the retroactive part of the law except to say , "sorry you cant' use that anymore it doesn't pass, stick to driving your car'

they can say "oh i'm not against motorcycles" if they are they are lying, then why make the law retroactive all the way to 2000?, usually laws are never retro active past the date they are enacted.

motorcyclists are such a small minority of motorists that if they were to go away, the general public would not give 2 sh%ts about it.. simple as that.

 

And it's a backdoor way to get at all those loud pipes, illegal race exhausts.  Just because they were all too lazy to police it before does not mean it's our right now.  

[Greg]

Guys - come on, you're letting your passion for motorcycles blind you, it's not about motorcycles, it's about all things SMOG related. First they waged war on cars, now they are turning their attention to ships, trains, boats, motorcycles, off-road equipment, and eventually anything with a motor down to the weed-eater level.

I don't like it any better than you, but this bill or one like it will eventually pass. Guess what? We'll survive, and motorcycle modding will still evolve but we'll have to pass smog checks. People still hot rod cars and they still manage to pass smog checks, so don't tell me it can't be done. So you won't be able to ditch the udder or canister, but I bet somebody will start selling exhausts that incorporate them and make them look better.

I'm not saying don't fight the Bill, but just realize that you are only delaying the inevitable.

[EvilSteve]

Guys - come on, you're letting your passion for motorcycles blind you, it's not about motorcycles, it's about all things SMOG related. First they waged war on cars, now they are turning their attention to ships, trains, boats, motorcycles, off-road equipment, and eventually anything with a motor down to the weed-eater level.

I don't like it any better than you, but this bill or one like it will eventually pass. Guess what? We'll survive, and motorcycle modding will still evolve but we'll have to pass smog checks. People still hot rod cars and they still manage to pass smog checks, so don't tell me it can't be done. So you won't be able to ditch the udder or canister, but I bet somebody will start selling exhausts that incorporate them and make them look better.

I'm not saying don't fight the Bill, but just realize that you are only delaying the inevitable.

+1

Same with noise legislation.

We've had a free ride for a long time when it comes to a lot of things, sooner or later it will end. Work towards making the proposed legislation equitable and as fair as possible. Any argument that says these rules shouldn't apply to us because we have motorcycles will be ignored.

[corey]

or just dont bother getting it inspected, and play the odds... makes it more exciting.

[hbliam]

or just dont bother getting it inspected, and play the odds... makes it more exciting.

They will just suspend your registration.

[Greg]

They will just suspend your registration.

Since you only have to get it done once every 2 years, I imagine many will opt for putting stock parts on every 2 years for the check and then reverting back after it passes.

[sfarchie]

Ok...  I've got a few things to say on this:  [steps onto platform]

4)  This bill (as it is currently penned) retroactively mandates testing on bikes back to 2000.  If they're going to do it, it really needs to be from the current model year ONWARD.  Not a retroactive punishment (it's not about the environment remember) for those who own bikes between 2000 and 2011 model year.
All in all, **if** this goes into effect as it is written it will only be to potentially line the states coffers some while putting undue financial burden on the motorcycling few while the burearucrats look the other way for foreign container ships and other gross polluters who have better lobbying than the average motorcyclist.

[gets off platform]

This part chaps my hide. I hope this will change if it passes.

[zedsaid]

Since you only have to get it done once every 2 years, I imagine many will opt for putting stock parts on every 2 years for the check and then reverting back after it passes.

I know i'll be boxing my stock cans when i get my BOOMTUBES!!!!

[Privateer]

I wrote my rep back when this first made news and here's the response he gave me:

Thank you for contacting my office regading your opposition to SB 435 (Pavley) relating to smog check for motorcycles.  I appreciate you taking the time to write me on issues mattering most to you.

You bring up some very valid points in your letter about the irrelevance of SB 435.  Like you, I have some serious concerns about this bill.  I would strongly encourage you to write a letter of opposition to the author (Pavley) and the Senate Transportation and Housing Chair (Lowenthal) so you are recorded officially in opposition to the bill.  I have included that information below for you.  In the meantime, I will do my part in Sacramento to oppose this legislation.

Senator Fran Pavley
State Capitol, Room 4035
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 651 4023

Senator Alan Lowenthal, Chair
Senate Transportation and housing Committee
State Capitol, Room 2209
Sacramento, CA 65814
(916) 651 4121

Once again, thank you for contacting me.  If I may be of further assistance in any state-related matter, please do not hesitate to contact me at either of my offices.  It is an honor to represent you in the State Senate.

Sincerely,
Bob Huff
Senator, 29th Senate District

i slacked on writing the letter, but did it today and faxing them off tomorrow.

[corey]

They will just suspend your registration.

That's interesting..
Here in PA, inspection has zippo to do with registration.
You can register any damn thing you want. It doesnt even have to have doors...
As long as it's insured, you can register it...

[Privateer]

That's interesting..
Here in PA, inspection has zippo to do with registration.
You can register any damn thing you want. It doesnt even have to have doors...
As long as it's insured, you can register it...

we don't have regularly scheduled "inspection" like other states, if that's what you're referring to.

When your registration comes, it includes a notice to get your emissions checked.  You go to a certified testing station, they do a visual to make sure everything complies with CARB, check that your gas cap seals properly, make sure you have no warning lights on your dash, then run the car on a dynometer while measuring exhaust gases.  They run it at two speeds, but I'm not sure what the speeds are exactly.  Station sends off electronic notice that you passed and then you send in your registration payment (altho some stations let you pay registration there).

If your vehicle doesn't have proper equipment (lights, etc) it's handled by LEO on the road.  I know there is some kind of inspection the DMV does, or is it the CHP, but never had experience with it.