RiderForums.com - Kawasaki Motorcycle Forum banner

1 - 20 of 52 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
472 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
California Senate Bill 435 (motorcycle exhaust) is on the Governor's desk
Contact the Governor today!


On August 30, 2010, the California Senate passed SB 435 by a vote of 21-16 and is on Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s desk. Despite state Senator Fran Pavley’s (D-CA-23) claims, the bill will do little to address excessive sound or reduce emissions, and is still unfairly targeting motorcycle owners.

In a letter, dated August 5, 2010, the American Motorcyclist Association (AMA) sent a letter to Governor Schwarzenegger urging him to veto SB 435. To view the governor’s reply, click here. In response to the Senate’s passage of SB 435, the AMA sent a follow-up letter, dated August 31, 2010, to the governor, continuing to urge a veto.

As written, SB 435 is not practical in a real world traffic stop situation due to the inconsistent location of the federal label, making it difficult for law enforcement to locate. These labels can be positioned on different locations depending on the type of exhaust and/or style of the motorcycle. This will result in improper and unwarranted citations.

Furthermore, after-market exhaust systems are not always louder than stock systems and can be installed for a variety of legitimate reasons. Stock exhaust can wear out over time, be damaged, unavailable or prohibitively expensive. If signed into law, motorcyclists, and motorcyclists alone, will be forced to purchase Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) parts, while automobile drivers will continue to be allowed to install exhaust components from non-OEM sources.

This bill is discriminatory and punitive. It will serve only to drive up the cost of ownership for every rider while doing little or nothing to actually address the issue of excessive motorcycle sound. Please contact the Governor's office today and request a veto of this unfair legislation.

The fastest way to reach the Governor is to call, (916) 445-2841. You can also send a pre-written message immediately by following the “Take Action” option and entering your information. The AMA encourages riders to personalize their message.

To view an AMA press release on SB 435, click here.

For those who want to do more, please utilize AMA tips and tools available at on our website at AmericanMotorcyclist.com > Rights > Get Involved, or for direct access, click here. If you are on Facebook, become a fan of the AMA at Facebook.com/AmericanMotorcyclist.

Please write or call the governor today and urge him to veto SB 435. Thank you for your active participation and efforts to encourage your friends and family to do the same.

http://capwiz.com/amacycle/issues/alert/?alertid=16039911&queueid=[capwiz:queue_id]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,570 Posts
So it's a bill to limit aftermarket exhausts? Why???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
141 Posts
Is it making the presumption that any after market exhaust is louder than the legal limit or is there an approval mark that after market producers can have added to their products?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
996 Posts
Is it making the presumption that any after market exhaust is louder than the legal limit or is there an approval mark that after market producers can have added to their products?
An exhaust would have to have EPA approval for sound and emissions (like the OEM) to be road legal. So far, none of the A/M pipes that I'm aware of have the requisite parts to make them able to pass EPA testing. Why do you think the upgraded pipe weighs so much less than the stock pipes? No catalyst, and far fewer baffles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,570 Posts
Just like anything else... Gov't screaming efficiency and emissions yet forcing us crap like ethanol and baffles. My fuel economy went UP with my Fuggins, and last year when I could get no-ethanol fuel, bike ran better than ever and got better mileage!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
217 Posts
Of course only in California !! Seems to me that is another way to get some extra money for the already bankrupt state.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
780 Posts
So that would also mean that people from neighbouring states with aftermarket Exhaust (or other provinces).. would not be able to bring their bikes to Cali without changing back to OEM
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
141 Posts
So that would also mean that people from neighbouring states with aftermarket Exhaust (or other provinces).. would not be able to bring their bikes to Cali without changing back to OEM
+1 from me. Do they propose to set-up road blocks at the borders and stop all machines entering the state and check their exhaust systems?

We had a daft law a few years back in the UK. The law itself was OK, it was about the use of scratch-resistant visors. Quite a sensible idea, all would agree that given the choice you should use a scratch resistant visor and outlawing all but scratch resistant visors isn't such a big deal.

However, the Tory Government of the day (probably 20-odd years back) wanted to apply to law retrospectively, not just to new sales of new helmets/visors. They also set-up up a penalty for failure to conform and ordered the police to stop and check motorcyclists were observing the new regulation. I remember at the time that this was ignored by the police and they refused to implement the new law.

Around the same time they also banned offside side cars on motorcycles. They took no advice from any motorcycle safety body, they had no statistics to show that offside sidecars were more dangerous than nearside sidecars, they just decided that it stood to reason they were dangerous. This notwithstanding that any motorcycle coming to the UK from the mainland of Europe with a sidecar would likely have an 'offside' one because they drive on the right! Stupid ****s!

The best one, also around this time, was the proposal to fit statutory leg protectors to all motorcycles. These are a kind of engine-bar protector but designed to protect your legs in the event of a collision. Clearly thought up by some *rse who never rode a bike or even talked to anyone who ever rode a bike. There was plenty of evidence that these would likely increase the chance of injury due to riders becoming entangled in the steel tubing bolted to their bikes. This was withdrawn due to public outcry and pressure from motorcycling organisations. You could say they saw sense, but it was Margaret Thatcher and Co. and they wouldn't know sense if it bit them in the *rse!

:soap: over, sorry about the politics but it was in herent in the thinking of the day: "We know best and you do as you're told!"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
128 Posts
before the lawmakers enact this rule, they should first forbide people from using non-FCC headlights on automobiles first. Some of these headlights really annoying, flaring into people eyes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
177 Posts
Hi, if this is a excessive sound issue they will get sued. Most market pipes are still within sound DB rating. They tried to enforce in ND. Officer would have you rev up engine while he took a decibel reading and issue a ticket. every car is capable of breaking the speed limit if you rev the engine up so write them a ticket too. If you have money in your pocket you could buy drugs so bust him for drugs. Just because it has the capability to break a law doesn't make it illegal. every ticket was throw out of court.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
472 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Hi, if this is a excessive sound issue they will get sued. Most market pipes are still within sound DB rating. They tried to enforce in ND. Officer would have you rev up engine while he took a decibel reading and issue a ticket. every car is capable of breaking the speed limit if you rev the engine up so write them a ticket too. If you have money in your pocket you could buy drugs so bust him for drugs. Just because it has the capability to break a law doesn't make it illegal. every ticket was throw out of court.
But if they pass this bill into law, it will be illegal to change your factory pipes for any reason. Even if you do it for looks and the after market pipes are under the legal Db limit (which most after market CRUISER pipes aren't) you would be in violation to this law.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
I just have one thing to say on this subject:

California Senate Bill 435 (motorcycle exhaust) is on the Governor's desk
Contact the Governor today!


On August 30, 2010, the California Senate passed SB 435 by a vote of 21-16 and is on Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s desk. Despite state Senator Fran Pavley’s (D-CA-23) claims, the bill will do little to address excessive sound or reduce emissions, and is still unfairly targeting motorcycle owners.

In a letter, dated August 5, 2010, the American Motorcyclist Association (AMA) sent a letter to Governor Schwarzenegger urging him to veto SB 435. To view the governor’s reply, click here. In response to the Senate’s passage of SB 435, the AMA sent a follow-up letter, dated August 31, 2010, to the governor, continuing to urge a veto.

As written, SB 435 is not practical in a real world traffic stop situation due to the inconsistent location of the federal label, making it difficult for law enforcement to locate. These labels can be positioned on different locations depending on the type of exhaust and/or style of the motorcycle. This will result in improper and unwarranted citations.

Furthermore, after-market exhaust systems are not always louder than stock systems and can be installed for a variety of legitimate reasons. Stock exhaust can wear out over time, be damaged, unavailable or prohibitively expensive. If signed into law, motorcyclists, and motorcyclists alone, will be forced to purchase Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) parts, while automobile drivers will continue to be allowed to install exhaust components from non-OEM sources.

This bill is discriminatory and punitive. It will serve only to drive up the cost of ownership for every rider while doing little or nothing to actually address the issue of excessive motorcycle sound. Please contact the Governor's office today and request a veto of this unfair legislation.

The fastest way to reach the Governor is to call, (916) 445-2841. You can also send a pre-written message immediately by following the “Take Action” option and entering your information. The AMA encourages riders to personalize their message.

To view an AMA press release on SB 435, click here.

For those who want to do more, please utilize AMA tips and tools available at on our website at AmericanMotorcyclist.com > Rights > Get Involved, or for direct access, click here. If you are on Facebook, become a fan of the AMA at Facebook.com/AmericanMotorcyclist.

Please write or call the governor today and urge him to veto SB 435. Thank you for your active participation and efforts to encourage your friends and family to do the same.

http://capwiz.com/amacycle/issues/alert/?alertid=16039911&queueid=[capwiz:queue_id]

The louder the bike, the smaller the ****.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
996 Posts
before the lawmakers enact this rule, they should first forbide people from using non-FCC headlights on automobiles first. Some of these headlights really annoying, flaring into people eyes.
What exactly are FCC headlights? And do you mean annoying like people dropping HID lights into sockets not designed for them?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
996 Posts
My favorite part:

SB 435 requires motorcycles to maintain their federally required emissions equipment on both original and aftermarket exhaust systems, including a readily visible EPA stamp that certifies compliance.
So under that standard, that could mean no undertail exhausts, and no under bike exhausts. Everything has to be out in the open, where it can be read.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
472 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
My favorite part:



So under that standard, that could mean no under tail exhausts, and no under bike exhausts. Everything has to be out in the open, where it can be read.
Worse than that. ANY aftermarket exhaust will be illegal. Even if it meets all the EPA requirements including volume it's illegal. It's a bad law because it discriminates against motorcycles. All other vehicles will still be treated as they are now. Even though they may be running illegal exhaust they won't be held to the same standards.
If you are interested in how the federal laws read, here is a link that will help to clarity what the laws really say.

http://www.aimag.com/epa/owners.htm
 
1 - 20 of 52 Posts
Top