California Senate Bill 435 (SB 435) would require all motorcycles built on or after January 1, 2000 to have stock exhaust systems.

I saw this in the August 2010 issue of American Motorcyclist, the AMA magazine. If it passes any motorcycle registered for street use (2000 and later model year) that has aftermarket exhaust would have to have stock exhaust installed, or be removed from street use. I'm guessing they chose that year since vehicle manufacturers are generally required to make OEM parts available for 10 years after manufacture.

I'm thinking we can thank all the Harley boys for this one.

 

Another great reason to own the fire-breathing 1998 Superhawk, I guess.

 

BTW: Anyone selling CF cans cheap all of a sudden...

 

Just another reason to be happy that I have a '98

 

But I do think you have the date wrong. What I have seen of the bill it was 2011 and later bikes.

Posted June 29, 2010

A key California State Assembly committee has endorsed a proposal to require motorcyclists to have EPA-compliant exhaust systems on their model year 2011 and newer motorcycles.

On June 28, the Committee on Transportation voted 8-4 to approve Senate Bill 435, introduced by Sen. Fran Pavley (D-Oxnard-Los Angeles), which would make it illegal to ride a motorcycle on the road built on, or after, Jan. 1, 2011, that doesn't display a federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) label certifying the exhaust system meets sound emissions standards.

Riders caught riding model year 2011 or newer motorcycles without this stamp would be issued "fix it" tickets by law enforcement officers.

The measure now goes to the Assembly Appropriations Committee for further consideration.

"Many EPA labels are very difficult to locate on motorcycles," said AMA Western States Representative Nick Haris. "This proposed law could lead to a flurry of tickets for motorcyclists who have legal exhaust systems on their machines with EPA labels that can't be easily seen. It's unreasonable to expect a law enforcement officer to easily locate an EPA label, and it's simply unfair to expect a motorcycle owner to partially dismantle an exhaust system alongside the road to prove the label exists.

"Requiring that a motorcycle display a readily visible EPA label isn't the correct way to address concerns about excessive motorcycle sound," he added. "The only objective way to determine whether a motorcycle complies with sound laws is for properly trained personnel to conduct sound level tests using calibrated meters and an agreed-upon testing procedure."

Haris suggested that concerned California motorcyclists contact their state lawmakers and urge them to reject Senate Bill 435. To do so, go here and select "CA" in the drop down menu.

The AMA has long maintained a position of strong opposition to excessive motorcycle sound. In September 2009, the AMA developed model legislation for use by cities and states seeking a simple, consistent and economical way to deal with sound complaints related to on-highway motorcycles within the larger context of excessive sound from all sources. The model legislation offers an objective method to evaluate motorcycle sound based on the Society of Automotive Engineers' (SAE) J2825 standard, "Measurement of Exhaust Sound Pressure Levels of Stationary On-Highway Motorcycles." For more information, click here.

Source: http://www.amadirectlink.com/news/story.asp?id=2072

 

Ssssshhhhhhhhhh.

 

Well if it passes i have a perfect set of stockers ill trade for nice set of aftermarket two brothers or jardines.

 

I have a pair of good stock cans available...for some strange reason I saw them on Kijiji and bought them..ooeerrr. $100 the pair...

 

I hope you're right Mike, but even so it sucks. The AMA mag says Jan. 1, 2000.

I'll see if I can pull up the bill.

 

Well the bill has been amended many times as it started out as a smog test bill. The info I posted was from the AMA web site from 6\29\10

 

http://www.aroundthecapitol.com/Bills/SB_435
So I think we'll be ok with the SH's




SB 435, as amended, Pavley. Vehicles: pollution control devices.
(1) Existing federal regulations require a motorcycle manufactured
on and after January 1, 1983, and exhaust emission systems for those
motorcycles, to meet specified noise emissions standards and require
that a label be affixed onto the motorcycle or exhaust emission
system indicating that the motorcycle or exhaust emission system
meets the noise emissions standards.
This bill would make it a crime for a person to park, use, or
operate a motorcycle, registered in the state, that is manufactured
on and after January 1, 2011 or a motorcycle, registered in the
state, with aftermarket exhaust system equipment that is manufactured
on or after January 1, 2011, that does not have the above label, and
would make a violation of this provision punishable by a specified
fine, thereby imposing a state mandated local program by creating a
new crime. The bill would require the person to whom a notice to
appear is issued, or against whom a complaint is filed, for the above
violation, to provide proof of correction. The bill would
authorize a court to dismiss the penalty imposed for a first
violation if the person produces proof of correction to the
satisfaction of the court.
(2) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse
local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the
state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that
reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this
act for a specified reason.

 

I checked it Mike, just finished dinner. The original bill, if you google CA SB 435, states 2000 and newer model year bikes would be subject to smog check.

When I last talked to a BAR representative, about 2 1/2 years ago, he told me they had no idea how they would implement a smog check program on motorcycles. Probably a visual inspection and idle/2500rpm no load emissions test (similar to BAR 84 and BAR 90 smog checks). I'm glad to see the 2011 date on the link you posted. The AMA needs to double check their sources, I guess.

Regardless, it still sucks. Not that motorcycles should be exempt from smog check, but I only ride my bike maybe 8 hours per week max, the weather and my body both permitting. But the gardeners all over the state are using emissions spewing lawnmowers and leaf blowers 40 hours per week. Not to mention the particulate pollution the leaf blowers create.

 

Yet one more reason a 98 is better!

 

They tried to pass the same thing in Utah last year and failed. I'm no fan of loud pipes, especially when I'm in my next to'em at a stop light, but of all the pressing issues we face, this one doesn't even come close to making my list. Doesn't California have a few pressing issues of their own besides "cracking down on loud motorcycles"? I would have thought that huge *** deficit they have would be a top issue, but that's just me.

 

not trying to derail the thread but the NRA may try that soon. The they threw their support behind Harry Reid for reelection. I mailed them my membership card back and told them where they could stick it and why.

 

Grandfather Laws.

These new type of laws are on shakey ground and would never stand up in any state supreme court if challenged.

New Laws can't go back in time and change the old existing laws only everything after the law goes into effect. Everything before the new law is grandfathered as a rule. That is if it is legal in 2010 to do it, in 2011 (new 2011 laws) rolls around you can't be ticketed for your bike that was legal in 2009. Just like emission laws, your 1970 car does not have to meet 2010 emission laws, just what was law in 1970. There are exceptions. A new general noise ordinance could possibly get your 2009 bike with after market exhaust a ticket. They would have to write tickets to buses, dump trucks, garbage trucks, planes also.

The new laws would only apply to 2010 later bikes. California already has bike emission laws and it is illegal to run aftermarket performance parts on cars down there, been that way for a long time. Having this apply to bikes now in California makes sense down there. I don't see this going farther than California. The bike manufacturers should lobby this, there is already no reason to buy a 2011 model bike as they are the same as the 2009 models as a rule, but $4000 more. Nobody is going to buy a new bike with this new proposed law, the bike makers should see this coming.

Can you imagine someone dropping $18K on a new Harley and not being able to spend $1500 on his custom new exhaust at the Dealer? This is how Harley makes all their money, in the mods and expensive aftermarket performance stuff. They should be screaming right now, fighting this bill.

 

Good for you! When an organization that is supposed to be supporting your cause starts working against you, I don't get it.

After checking up on what 8541 and RK pointed out about the AMA, our membership with them may end. Cops have always had the right to check for too loud pipes. We don't need extra legislation for it.

And again, my SuperHawk isn't half as loud as 90% of the Harleys on the road. And what's with allowing 3 and 4 cylinder bikes to be louder under the AMA suggestion?

As for California state government, our wacky legislature has been out of control for years.

 

Just gut the stock canister and put it around the aftermarket exhaust.