Looks like our free ride may be over.

[Gimpy]

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/03/05/california-may-soon-require-smog-checks-for-motorcycles/

I think  its a good thing.  I like clean air an all, but sheesh this could be a pain in the ass.  I hope my everybody's non stock exhaust passes.  Good thing I have left the charcoal canister on.   

[desmoquattro]

It's more subtle than that. Even with stock exhaust, the bikes come tuned very lean to pass model-based emissions tests. If they start checking them every few years the shops are going to have a lot of business leaning, then richening bikes.

I suspect this is a move to get more revenue for the state, since we have a structural budget deficit.

[Spidey]

Retroactive to 2000 is bullshit.  And someone needs to explain to me how this gets a bunch more revenue for the state.  Revenue for smog check places and for shops?  Sure. But the state?

I'm really surprised there isn't a bigger lobby against this. 

[sally101]

Dude we are all screwed if this passes.. But maybe not as screwed as Harley riders..

[desmoquattro]

Retroactive to 2000 is bullshit.  And someone needs to explain to me how this gets a bunch more revenue for the state.  Revenue for smog check places and for shops?  Sure. But the state?

Part of your smog check fee goes to the state. And the state gets to carve out funds (from the general fund, specific fees on registrations, etc) to set up a bureaucracy around this.

I'd almost support this if there were a grandfather clause. And my catalytic converter was recently "stolen" by the management of the storage unit it sat in (long story) so what am I gonna do? Spend $600 on another cow udder? Ouch.

There's a lot of misinformation out there about bikes and pollution. We've covered it here before. I've had some of my Green (as in party, not movement) friends claim that the average motorcycle pollutes several times the amount of the average car. But there are a lot of problems with that comparison, mostly stemming from the fact that you're comparing one data set with very good data (cars, which are mostly tested) versus one with a small sample size (a few motorcycles that some partisan group pulled in as representative). And there's often an agenda behind that kind of statement.

It seems to me that there is much more low-hanging fruit out there. SUVs, light trucks, and single-person commuters all seem like much larger sources of pollution and/or carbon. I'm wondering: does anyone have solid numbers around how many moto registrations there are in CA vs cars?

[Spidey]

Are you really gonna argue that motos are green??  Bikes--despite good gas mileage--are dirty as make the beast with two backs.  I don't wanna have smog checks, but come on, mang. 

[b.]

Part of your smog check fee goes to the state. And the state gets to carve out funds (from the general fund, specific fees on registrations, etc) to set up a bureaucracy around this.

I just had the smog test done on my car and only $8.00 of that ass-raping cost was to pay for the certificate, which I assume is money that goes directly to the state.  I'm not positive, but doesn't the testing facility get to keep the money they charge to run the actual test?...anyone know if these testing facilities have to remit a portion of their revenues to the state?

I moved to Cali from Washington State and up there all the emissions testing facilities, like the liquor stores, are run by the state.  If this were the case in CA, then I could see a lot of money being made to get us out of this massive hole we're in.

I suppose there are A LOT of bikes in California though, and at $8 bucks a pop vs. the previous nothing, we're an untapped resource of funds.

[johnc]

this is bad, bad, bad.  and it IS going to generate revenue for the state as dq points out, and it is exactly because motorcyclists don't have a good lobbying group that looks after us, that this shit law will pass.    

if the law was presented/passed as not including the grandfather clause, then it would be acceptable ... but having it be retroactive to 2000 is absolute bullshit.

if this DOES pass as written with retro clause ... i am going to register all my bikes in another state.  fuc california law makers.

[desmoquattro]

Are you really gonna argue that motos are green??  Bikes--despite good gas mileage--are dirty as make the beast with two backs.  I don't wanna have smog checks, but come on, mang. 

I never stated that. I stated that we don't have good data. And I said that most of the people who've made that argument to me had an agenda...like getting rid of any form of internal combustion engine-based transportation. I'm more of an agnostic on this than a partisan. I want to know whether, on aggregate, motorcycles contribute significantly to the various air quality problems in CA. you can argue that an individual bike is dirty, but how is it dirty? And are there enough of them on the road, being driven every day, to justify a smog check program? As I said before, there has to be lower-hanging fruit...like my truck

[Spidey]

The smart move here is to argue against it being retroactive.   Let the law pass, but make it effective on motos sold after it passes (or after it goes into effect).  Few politicians are going to vote against smogging motos, not matter how much of a fuss people kick up.  However, they can be talked into an amendment that doesn't make it retroactive. 

The moto manufacturers should be lobbying hard against this.  I betcha that many of hte bikes in stock trim won't pass.  Or there will be significant damage to the bikes from running them so lean.  That's going to create a giant clustermake the beast with two backs down the line. 

[johnc]

there has to be lower-hanging fruit...like my truck

your truck is gay?    i keed, i keed.

anyway, back on topic ... motorcyclist that can/do vote need to let their state representatives know that they are voters, and think this is a bullshit proposal (if indeed they have a brain in their heads and can see that this IS a bullshit proposal).

[johnc]

agree ... if not grandfathered this law would make sense.

and if the moto manufacturers were on top of laws being proposed, they would have fought against the other bullshit law that now prohibits sales of minibikes/motorcycles to kids under the age of 12, as THAT law directly impacts their revenues, whereas this bullshit smog law will not:

The new lead rules that have banned the sales of many youth all-terrain vehicles and motorcycles could lead to $1 billion in lost economic value in 2009 for the industry, predicts the Motorcycle Industry Council.

The projected loss is based on 2008 estimated value of the retail marketplace for ATVs and off-highway motorcycles and factors out vehicles and related economic value not included as part of the ban. MIC projects that the estimated value of the retail marketplace related to all youth ATVs and off-highway motorcycles exceeds $1.5 billion, but the ban applies only to products that are intended primarily for youth aged 12 and under. Powersports companies have stopped selling affected youth products with lead content in excess of the limits identified in the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act that went into force February 10.

"The potential losses for the powersports industry are massive at a time when this country cannot afford additional economic losses," said Paul Vitrano, general counsel for MIC and SVIA. "With these vehicles sitting in warehouses instead of on showroom floors, the related sales of most protective gear, accessories, and parts and services are virtually non-existent. Thousands of small businesses across America are impacted by this ban."

Dealers from every corner of the country and other concerned individuals have sent more than 100,000 letters to the U.S. Congress urging support for exclusions from the act for powersports vehicles, parts and accessories. MIC and the Specialty Vehicle Institute of America have spearheaded the massive letter-writing campaign, along with Rep. Tom Self of Missouri, the American Motorcyclist Association, The BlueRibbon Coalition, and Americans for Responsible Recreational Access. MIC's website (MIC.ORG) contains background and updated information about this serious issue facing the powersports industry and has links to tools to contact the Consumer Product Safety Commission and Congress to express support for industry's requests for relief.

Those calling for the exclusions believe that the lead-content provisions of the act, which originally were aimed at toys that can be mouthed by children, were never intended to apply to youth ATVs and motorcycles. Most of the components making up youth powersports products are in compliance. But some parts, that youth would not ingest, unavoidably contain small quantities of lead in excess of the CPSIA limits, such as the valve stems on the tires, aluminum in some brake components, and the terminals on the batteries.

The Motorcycle Industry Council exists to preserve, protect and promote motorcycling through government relations, communications and media relations, statistics and research, aftermarket programs, development of data communications standards, and activities surrounding technical and regulatory issues. It is a not-for-profit, national trade association representing manufacturers and distributors of motorcycles, scooters, motorcycle/ATV/ROV parts and accessories, and members of allied trades such as publishing companies, advertising agencies, insurance firms and consultants. The MIC is headquartered in Irvine, Calif., with a government relations office adjacent to Washington, D.C. First called the MIC in 1970, the organization has been in operation since 1914.

* The economic value of the retail marketplace includes retail sales of vehicles (new and used), parts and accessories, dealer servicing, product advertising, vehicle financing charges, insurance premiums, dealer personnel salaries, state sales and dealer personnel income taxes, and vehicle registration fees.

The smart move here is to argue against it being retroactive.   Let the law pass, but make it effective on motos sold after it passes (or after it goes into effect).  Few politicians are going to vote against smogging motos, not matter how much of a fuss people kick up.  However, they can be talked into an amendment that doesn't make it retroactive. 

The moto manufacturers should be lobbying hard against this.  I betcha that many of hte bikes in stock trim won't pass.  Or there will be significant damage to the bikes from running them so lean.  That's going to create a giant clustermake the beast with two backs down the line. 

[b.]

anyway, back on topic ... motorcyclist that can/do vote need to let their state representatives know that they are voters, and think this is a bullshit proposal (if indeed they have a brain in their heads and can see that this IS a bullshit proposal).

Use the link below posted by sugarcrook when this topic was first brought up in GMF.

If you live in CA, here's where to find the address to write to your local senator/representative:

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/yourleg.html

[EEL]

So  basically, I need a new power commander map to make my bike run like shit for two hours or so.....

I can do that.. All fuel table values to -20!

Go ahead...smog my boomtubes..

[johnc]

so rather than pregnant dog about this stupid law, get involved and be a part of the solution ...

ABATE is asking its members (and anyone else that can stand up and be an adult about it) to not contact Fran Pavley, she knows motorcylists don't like her, but to contact the other Senators on this Committee asking them as one of their constituents, to PLEASE OPPOSE SB435.

Please write to this address:
Senate Transportation Committee
State Capitol
Room 209
Sacramento, CA 95814

These are all of the Transportation Committee Members:
Chairman:
District 28 (LA Metro) - Alan Lowenthal
Vice Chairman:
District 29 (LA Metro) - Senator Robert Huff
Chairpersons:
District 05 (Solano and East Bay Delta) - Senator Lois Wolk
District 07 (CoCo, Alameda) - Senator Mark Desaulnier
District 11 (Marin Area) - Senator Joe Simitian
District 18 (San Bernardino) - Senator Roy Ashburn
District 23 (LA Metro) - Senator Fran Pavley
District 28 (LA Metro) - Senator Jenny Oropeza
District 35 (LA Metro) - Senator Tom Harman
District 36 (San Diego Area) - Senator Dennis Hollingsworth
District 39 (San Diego Area) - Senator Christine Kehoe
www.senate.ca.gov