No big suprises here but still....Talk amongst yourselves

http://www.latimes.com/classif...story

 

My 2007 GSXR 750 came with a cat so I'm part of the solution.



That is until I took a sawzall to it.








However, I did recycle the cat (because they are worth $25.00).

for going green

 

Nice

I took all the Kawi KLEEN **** off my bike too. Damn charcol canister was taking up my storage space under the cowl. Now I can fit a hat or bottle of water in there. Yippee

 

I liked that, "Till i took a sawzall to it" lol that made me laugh..

I just recently took a sawzall to my stock cans as well just to see what was in it..lol

 

My 600rr has a cat and some other smog stuff in place... until I get an exhaust anyhow.

 

Mine does too. I love sneaking up on people on the track with my stock pipe and then blowing by. I see no point in removing all the smog **** until I get a full exhaust system. Even then, the power gains/weight savings are less than spectacular. I'll be waiting to see how the proposed SMOGing of bikes goes in the next couple years.

 

Are 600cc and 1000cc sportbikes really the concern here? Because most Harleys/Other Cruisers sport a 1200cc, 1600cc, or 1800cc engine. 1 1800cc Harley/Other Cruiser might put out as much or even more smog than 3 600cc sportbikes. Hmmm.

 

It's not based off the size, it boils down more to efficiency. I'm not sure about everyone else but I spew black smoke when I rev my motor and get on it hard. I hardly think my bike qualifies as eco-friendly (unless eco is economy and not ecosystem)

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Quiks66 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Mine does too. I love sneaking up on people on the track with my stock pipe and then blowing by. I see no point in removing all the smog **** until I get a full exhaust system. Even then, the power gains/weight savings are less than spectacular. I'll be waiting to see how the proposed SMOGing of bikes goes in the next couple years.</TD></TR></TABLE>


Removing the cat on my bike was the best thing I've ever done for it hands down. I get nothing but compliments on the sound of my bike. There's also nothing better than the stock look. I probably dropped 10-15lbs off the bike just by the cat alone and I was able to make money ($25.00) by selling it for scrap. The power gains are the same as the average slip-on and since I ride a 750 to commute, I have plenty of power.

And there's no better rush than taking a sawzall to a brand new bike that you only rode for 50 miles.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by EngineNoO9 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It's not based off the size, it boils down more to efficiency. I'm not sure about everyone else but I spew black smoke when I rev my motor and get on it hard. I hardly think my bike qualifies as eco-friendly (unless eco is economy and not ecosystem)</TD></TR></TABLE>

Well seeing as how they're saying 1% of vehicles are motorcycles that account for 10% of smog.....size matters. Especially when 1 cruiser vehicle can match the size of 3 sportbikes.

And who burns fossil fuels more effeciently than japanese sportbikes? Definately not a Harley.
Sounds like you need to tune your bike sir.

 

It is tuned. The bike likes to run rich and I use the accell pump feature on the PC3 to increase it a little more when the throttle is being applied. It's not a street bike anymore either.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by knockout &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Well seeing as how they're saying 1% of vehicles are motorcycles that account for 10% of smog.....size matters. Especially when 1 cruiser vehicle can match the size of 3 sportbikes.

And who burns fossil fuels more effeciently than japanese sportbikes? Definately not a Harley.
Sounds like you need to tune your bike sir.</TD></TR></TABLE>

When that cruiser gets 10 mpg on average more then a lot of sportbikes, I'd like for you to explain how it puts out more pollution.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by knockout &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Well seeing as how they're saying 1% of vehicles are motorcycles that account for 10% of smog.....size matters. Especially when 1 cruiser vehicle can match the size of 3 sportbikes.

And who burns fossil fuels more effeciently than japanese sportbikes? Definately not a Harley.
Sounds like you need to tune your bike sir.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Your logic sucks, and doesn't even make sense within it's own confines. If "size", and please, keep your terms straight, we're talking about engine displacement, matters, then why does a motorcycle emit far greater emissions than Civics and Cororllas, which have higher displacements, and are under greater load at all times? And since you're referring to "size", you can't use the 1%/10% logic to relate to engine displacement.

Ceteris paribis, bigger engines will produce more emissions than smaller engines. But guess what? We don't operate in a a world of zero variable, and off road motorycles and scooters (and they're likely referring to 2 strokers in the article) have hugely awful emissions. Even 4 stroke singles have few of the emissions controls that their sportbike brethern maintain. And then there's the matter of number of cylinders, air recycling valves, charcoal canisters, cats, and so forth.

I would not expect much change from upcoming emissions legislation for the sportbike community. And you West coasters, it's emissions regulation, not "SMOG" regulations. Keep your silly acronyms and poor english to yourselves. Don't contaminate the rest of the country. The road-going motorcycle community has been attempting to self regulate since the early part of this decade. The manufacturers figure that it we beat the lawmakers to the punch, we'll be able to do things our way, and design around the controls, rather than have huge bottlenecks and weighty devices attached to our machines over night.

The un-plated dirtbikes probably won't see much change. You can't tell people that they can't use dirty dirtbikes on private property. Plated dirtbikes? Eh, we'll see. But they're such a small niche fraction of the motorcycling community that I doubt they'll get tagged too harshly.

Lastly, I really doubt the accuracy of the 1%/10% statement. You can't measure a heavily polluting, but low use motorcycle and take it as an appropriate cross sectin of the community. What is the "average" motorcycle referenced in the article? Why are scooters included in this measurement? Scooters are not representative of motorcycles in any way. If cats are too big, heavy, or otherwise unable to be fitted to motorcycles, why doesn't the author reference the cats fitted on tons of road going motorcycles now? Motorcycles are more polluting than Hummers? Which ones are we talking about? Where's the substnatiation for that claim? What about the factors of production that casued pollution in the refinement of oil used to create the gasoline that the hummer is burning?

For an article purporting to be of scientific nature, it sure has a lot of bias, little to no actual data, and a lot of convenient assumptions.

 

Mine has a cat and smog equipment. Who gives a [freak]. I'll leave it on there and save my time

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ASteele2 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

I would not expect much change from upcoming emissions legislation for the sportbike community. And you West coasters, it's emissions regulation, not "SMOG" regulations. Keep your silly acronyms and poor english to yourselves. Don't contaminate the rest of the country. The road-going motorcycle community has been attempting to self regulate since the early part of this decade. The manufacturers figure that it we beat the lawmakers to the punch, we'll be able to do things our way, and design around the controls, rather than have huge bottlenecks and weighty devices attached to our machines over night.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Easy, buddy. In California, we "SMOG" our vehicles. It's no acronym. C.A.R.B. which stands for the California Air Resources Board oversees modifications to all parts of emissions systems in our cars (ie aftermarket intakes/headers).



I understand your frustration with the article but I don't understand why you're making negative generalizations about us "West coasters"

 

ASteele2 - I'm not writing an essay nor do i care what you think of my grammar/spelling. This is an internet forum...not a term paper.

Did you understand what I meant by size? Yes you understood it to be "engine displacement", so stfu. I dont feel like typing that everytime I refer to it, you know what i meant so find another way to be an *******.

However most Harleys do get about the same mpg as a sportbike. So i admit being wrong to that. But do Harleys have cats?

 

Son of a... I had a great post written out that addressed both posts.

Damnit.

Quiks - unfortunately my joke was lost. Despite California's funny grammatical idiosyncracies and strange water that you call gas, I still prefer it to my coast. Please, bear with my bitterness.

and knockout - unfortunately, I was actually unable to determine exactly what you meant. Although I seemed to accurately gather that you were referring to displacement, linking displacement to Real emissions output isn't something that we can do. You seemed to be trying to indicate that larger motors that get worse fuel economy will generate more semissions than smaller ones that are more economical. Since emissiosn are much more a function of emissions-related-design than displacement anything else, we can't make any generalizations about whcih motorcycles will make more or less "stink" by superficial analysis.

A lot of Harleys are coming equipped with cats these days. They are "hidden" in the form of "catalytic mufflers" for aesthetic purposes. They also come equipped with a whole host of other obnoxious emissions specific equipment that generally serves be more stuff to break, and make things more complicated (honestly, I'm not bitter at all). Emissions set up is far more than just slapping a cat on something and calling it clean.

The biggest emissions offenders in our community often wear 21" front wheels. Outside our community, but still two wheelers, the litte step-through tiny-wheelers (scooters) are also rather awful "stink" makers. These types of two wheelers often carty far smaller motors than anything generic motorcyclists ride, but they make disproporitionate emissions because they have little to no emissions controls at all (and two strokers are awful offenders in general).

 

Holy **** this sux, after I took out all my emission stuff on my RC. And there is no way ima put all that s#it back it.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by EngineNoO9 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It's not based off the size, it boils down more to efficiency. I'm not sure about everyone else but I spew black smoke when I rev my motor and get on it hard. I hardly think my bike qualifies as eco-friendly (unless eco is economy and not ecosystem)</TD></TR></TABLE>

My daytona does the same. It would not pass smog, and that three cylinder LOVES fuel.

 

My bike shoots flames. Very eco friendly.