CA wants to smog check motorcycles

[Particle Man]

Originally Posted by t-rock

What is the difference between buying a bike without one and removing one from a bike that does?

semantics...

[neebelung]

Originally Posted by pdog

I'd like to see the OEMs and aftermarket guys work on exhausts that can be a little louder than stock ...

You know what pisses me off more than people removing the CC? Guys who compensate for a small pee-pee with obnoxiously loud exhaust.























Oh yeah, and FWIW, I could give two shits if people remove the CC.

[pdog]

One is modifying your bike so it pollutes more, the other is not?

Originally Posted by t-rock

What is the difference between buying a bike without one and removing one from a bike that does?

[Particle Man]

Originally Posted by pdog

One is modifying your bike so it pollutes more, the other is not?

one could argue that all that happens when the CC is removed is that it meets the same emission standards as those bikes that don't have one... are you saying that having one without a CC is somehow better?

Not trying to be a dick, just confused.

[pdog]

Actually I appreciate the rational comment. Thanks.

In a word, no. I would prefer a bike with a CC, all other things being equal.

A bike must meet the air standards applicable in the year it was made. My bike is a 2005 and comes without a CC. It met emissions standards in TX that year. I'm sure bikes sold in CA in the last year or two had to have CCs simply to meet the ever-tightening air standards. I have no problem with people rolling around on older, non-CC bikes - they were legal when they were sold and still are legal due to grandfather clauses. But you can't buy a 2008, remove the CC and claim it meets 2005 standards so it is legal.

Originally Posted by Particle Man

one could argue that all that happens when the CC is removed is that it meets the same emission standards as those bikes that don't have one... are you saying that having one without a CC is somehow better?

Not trying to be a dick, just confused.

[zed]

Originally Posted by pdog

Actually I appreciate the rational comment. Thanks.

In a word, no. I would prefer a bike with a CC, all other things being equal.

A bike must meet the air standards applicable in the year it was made. My bike is a 2005 and comes without a CC. It met emissions standards in TX that year. I'm sure bikes sold in CA in the last year or two had to have CCs simply to meet the ever-tightening air standards. I have no problem with people rolling around on older, non-CC bikes - they were legal when they were sold and still are legal due to grandfather clauses. But you can't buy a 2008, remove the CC and claim it meets 2005 standards so it is legal.

that is the answer to the question.

also, in some states they will not pass inspection with an after market exhaust.

[Particle Man]

Originally Posted by pdog

I'm sure bikes sold in CA in the last year or two had to have CCs simply to meet the ever-tightening air standards.

Longer than a year or 2: the SV has had a CA version since at least 2003 as it was an option back when I bought my bike (they weren't options but were mandatory if I were to buy it in CA at the time)... IIRC, it has a decreased fuel capacity in order to fit all the additional "stuff" for the emissions system.



Thx for the response and not thinking that I was being a dick... for once, I wasn't trying to be

[Dave]

Originally Posted by Particle Man

semantics...

this argument makes about as much sense as a vegan saying he can wear a fur coat and leather pants cause they were a gift from his mom.

[Antwanny]

lol a lot of illegal motorcycles will be on the street

[Particle Man]

Originally Posted by Dave

this argument makes about as much sense as a vegan saying he can wear a fur coat and leather pants cause they were a gift from his mom.