I'm with the government. I'm here to help!

[kitze2]

First Dynojet...Who's next!:bluduh


http://www.roadracingworld.com/news/article/?article=31021

[maxscycle]

I won't condem dynajet, but if we just left our bikes epa legal as they left the factory we could all breath a little easier. Before you get after me. I ran my 4 harleys a total of 310,000 +- miles with factory exhaust and engine, and they ran fine. My 06r12gs and my 96r11rt area also oem stock and run like a dream.
max

[PGlaves]

First Dynojet...Who's next!:bluduh


http://www.roadracingworld.com/news/article/?article=31021

Never confuse what happens in California as being representative of much of anything else. They are masters of inventing complicated solutions to common problems.

[kbasa]

When I was a kid, I lived in San Diego. We'd go visit my uncle in Whittier, up in LA and the smog was terrible. In all the times we visited them, we never saw the mountains. That was back around 1969 - 1972.

Over the last few years, I've been back to LA a number of times. You can actually see the mountains and the air is noticeably cleaner.

I'm fine with emissions controls on automobiles and bikes. My bikes are all stock, all the way through. As a lifelong asthmatic, good breathing has always been important to me. If CARB wants to ensure that products sold in this state meet laws already in effect, it sounds to me like I'm getting what I pay for as a taxpayer.

[sachiwilson]

I remember well what the air was like back in the early 70s, with uncontrolled cars blowing raw hydrocarbons all over. I remember trying to breathe that air when I was in traffic, and I remember trying to look through the photochemical haze that arose because of it. That was 35 years ago, with many, many fewer cars and people than we have today. I am VERY thankful that the EPA and CARB are forcing solutions to this problem. Down here in San Diego we don't have perfect air by a long shot but it still is hugely better than it would be without the controls.

Let's not ever forget that we have to breathe this stuff.

[DarrylRi]

I grew up in The Valley. (That would be, like, the San Fernando Valley, d00d.) I lived there for 33 years, up until 1991. My folks and my brother's family still live down there.

When I visit these days, I am amazed at how clear the air is. It's not uncommon now to be able to see from one end of The Valley to the other on a 95F day in the summer. That never happened when I lived there.

My wife's family is in Riverside, 90 miles to the east. They used to complain bitterly about the smog that blew out their way from LA when there was an onshore breeze. My Father-In-Law lives just 3 miles from a mountain range. When I was dating my wife in the early 80s, you could never see those mountains in the summer. Now it's clear all the time.

A part of LA's air quality problem has to do with geography. When there's a cool onshore breeze from the Pacific, it forms a cap over the LA basin and the inland valleys, at about 2,500 feet. The smog is blocked from rising above this point, and everyone gets to stew in it. It can build for days at a time, until those infamous Santa Ana winds clear it out.

What's amazing to me is the couple of times I've been through Houston. In case you aren't aware, Houston is duking it out with LA for the country's worst air. But Houston is entirely flat. There are no geographical features holding in the smog. It looks every bit as bad to me as the LA I left, and that's with cars that are 25 years newer.

If it takes rubber snorkels on gas pumps, low VOC paints, new dry cleaning techniques, new formulation BBQ lighter fluid, getting rid of 2 stroke motors, cannisters on bikes, and big fines for industries that cause pollution, I'm for it. (These are among the hundreds of changes that were instituted to try to clean up LA's air.)

Everyone's gotta breathe.

[kitze2]

I guess I should've posted a comment that elaborated on my opinion. I too remember the major smog of the 70s. And yes, things are much better. And with improved emissions on vehicles comes the higher efficiency we all love, too a certain extent at least. What really frightens me about Dynojets fine? Every single power commander sold carries the warning "Not Legal For Road Use In California" So Dynojet is fined $1 million plus an unknown amount in legal fees because they can't force their customers to not install their product on road bikes. Personally I've only ever installed power commanders on my track bikes. But how many of us have techilusion modules on our beemers? What about PIAA driving lights? Their box said "Off Road Use Only" Or any number of illegal aftermarket mods. The point is that we the consumer bare the onus for maintaining our bikes and cars in street legal trim.
Personelly I believe that in the very near future motorcycles will be required to have periodic safety/emission inspections. At least in California. And like it or not most of the US adopts CARB rules sooner or later. So do I agree with inspections? Well, if it gets rid of the idiots with their 120db open pipes. I guess I'd have to say yes. If it means I have to get rid of my auxiliary lights. I guess I'd say no. The issue is too complicated for one sentence answers.
But hammering Dynojet out of business serves no one.

By the way...I guess I should not have posted this in the tech forum. But I can't figure out how to move the thread.

[kbasa]

Personelly I believe that in the very near future motorcycles will be required to have periodic safety/emission inspections. At least in California.

This has been the norm in MA for as long as I can remember.

[jingdog]

Emission controls in CA will probably be a moot issue soon. Soon there will be imported smog from China to deal with. :D Anyone been over there can compare it with the worst we have here?

[OfficerImpersonator]

When I was a kid, I lived in San Diego. We'd go visit my uncle in Whittier, up in LA and the smog was terrible. In all the times we visited them, we never saw the mountains. That was back around 1969 - 1972.

Over the last few years, I've been back to LA a number of times. You can actually see the mountains and the air is noticeably cleaner.

I'm fine with emissions controls on automobiles and bikes. My bikes are all stock, all the way through. As a lifelong asthmatic, good breathing has always been important to me. If CARB wants to ensure that products sold in this state meet laws already in effect, it sounds to me like I'm getting what I pay for as a taxpayer.

Didn't I read somewhere that you performed a cannisterectomy on an R-bike? Or do I have you confused with someone else?

I lived in L.A. from birth in 1968 until my parents moved back to Seattle in '79. We lived in the Glendale Hills, just above the Rose Bowl and below the Art Center College of Design at an elevation about 500' above the San Gabriel Valley.

Like most Southern California homes, we had a swimming pool in our back yard. My sister and I would spend the better part of the hot summer playing in the pool. At the end of a long day of swimming, our lungs would ache. Occasionally, I'd cough up hard rocks of phlegm which would break apart into smaller parts when squeezed between your fingers. 9 year olds are not suppose to cough up chunks of hard phlegm. This all went away as soon as we moved to the Seattle area. The only possible explanation is that our aching lungs and chunks of beige stuff we coughed up were due to the emissions from the cars we breathed in deeply every day. I recall not being able to go out and play at recess because the smog was so bad.

So I'm all for regulations limiting smog. It saves lives. Period. I could care less if your bike doesn't perform as well with the emission control devices - they are there for a reason. The health of your neighbors is far more important than squeezing an extra horsepower or two out of your engine.

[kbasa]

Didn't I read somewhere that you performed a cannisterectomy on an R-bike? Or do I have you confused with someone else?


On my R12GS, I removed the evaporative canister. It collects gas fumes, condenses them and returns them to the throttle bodies for burning.

My single sin for emissions. Still have the cats on all the bikes. :dunno

[OfficerImpersonator]

On my R12GS, I removed the evaporative canister. It collects gas fumes, condenses them and returns them to the throttle bodies for burning.

My single sin for emissions. Still have the cats on all the bikes. :dunno

Just keepin' you honest, Mr. "All My Bikes Are Stock" :)

[kbasa]

Just keepin' you honest, Mr. "All My Bikes Are Stock" :)

Truthfully, I'd completely forgotten that I'd removed it.

Bikes actually run pretty well, even with all the emissions stuff on them, so it's never really bothered me. I even left the canister on my R11S, which has the Worst Placement Ever.

I'm more likely to focus on suspension and ergonomics. I don't need a bigger hammer, I just need one I can hold on to better. :)

[OfficerImpersonator]

Truthfully, I'd completely forgotten that I'd removed it.

Bikes actually run pretty well, even with all the emissions stuff on them, so it's never really bothered me. I even left the canister on my R11S, which has the Worst Placement Ever.

I'm more likely to focus on suspension and ergonomics. I don't need a bigger hammer, I just need one I can hold on to better. :)

Or not hit myself in the thumb with it. :thumb

[BubbaZanetti]

This has been the norm in MA for as long as I can remember.

not emissions, but safety, yes

although, getting around it is pretty dang easy, i knew from experience with the airhead:laugh

[wozerd]

I'm a little cynical about anything politicians do. I don't for one second believe CA policticians give one whit about beige chunks from 9 year old lungs. It is all about power and money. 1 million in fines is a nice chunk of bucks. How long before a politician from another state reads about this and says--"heeyyyy!"
I have read that surging RT's are cured by after market ECM modification. Why did the bike surge? Lot's of reasons from misadjustment to the fact that it was only able to pass EPA tests if it was running an A/F ratio that caused surging.
This is my first EFI BMW (so forgive me if I come across ignorant). But, having owned 3 previous Japanese models with EFI, the rideability change is day and night. 3000 steady RPM on my RC51 would buck you over the bars with a snapped neck. Installed a PCiii and all but gone. Plus, 10 extra HP, better gas mileage and an extra-- I dunno-- 10-15 MPH top end.
Did it pollute the air? the answer can only be YES if compared to that bike in stock form. Compared to an automobile? No-- still way less. Plus, to make the bike rideable, I had to drop to a lower gear, increasing RPM, increasing exhaust, increasing pollutants. So, quite possibly, the PCiii reduced polution in real world driving.
Now, lets not forget Global Warming. The air is cleaner across the country because of pollution controls. Meaning-- less suspended particulates in the air. Less suspended particulates means less filtering of the sun. More sunlight hits the Earth surface, the ground absorbs more heat (we won't mention all the asphalt in California), increasing overall daily temperatures. Cleaner air may also allow more harmful UV rays causing skin cancer.
The real concern here is -- when other states (and they have already begun) see the potential income from actions like this, they too will jump on the bandwagon. Soon, any modification to your bike will be limited to government approved accessories and cost 3-4 times more.

Don't believe me? Ask any German or Brit.

[kitze2]

Now, lets not forget Global Warming. The air is cleaner across the country because of pollution controls. Meaning-- less suspended particulates in the air. Less suspended particulates means less filtering of the sun. More sunlight hits the Earth surface, the ground absorbs more heat (we won't mention all the asphalt in California), increasing overall daily temperatures. Cleaner air may also allow more harmful UV rays causing skin cancer.


I'm absolutely speechless:heh

[kbasa]

I'm absolutely speechless:heh

Yeah, no kidding. This whole state is paved. :ha

[lancew]

Now, lets not forget Global Warming. The air is cleaner across the country because of pollution controls. Meaning-- less suspended particulates in the air. Less suspended particulates means less filtering of the sun. More sunlight hits the Earth surface, the ground absorbs more heat (we won't mention all the asphalt in California), increasing overall daily temperatures. Cleaner air may also allow more harmful UV rays causing skin cancer.


Be right back, gotta go outside - after reading this I'm going to start my wife's diesel and leave it idling 24-7 so we don't get skin cancer.

:bolt

[85138]

Now, lets not forget Global Warming. The air is cleaner across the country because of pollution controls. Meaning-- less suspended particulates in the air. Less suspended particulates means less filtering of the sun. More sunlight hits the Earth surface, the ground absorbs more heat (we won't mention all the asphalt in California), increasing overall daily temperatures. Cleaner air may also allow more harmful UV rays causing skin cancer.


Wow! And who instituted the pollution controls? Some altruism by the polluters?

I could see the argument on bikes polluting so much less than cars due to their relatively limited use and ways they're used.

[OfficerImpersonator]

I'm a little cynical about anything politicians do. I don't for one second believe CA policticians give one whit about beige chunks from 9 year old lungs. It is all about power and money. 1 million in fines is a nice chunk of bucks. How long before a politician from another state reads about this and says--"heeyyyy!"
I have read that surging RT's are cured by after market ECM modification. Why did the bike surge? Lot's of reasons from misadjustment to the fact that it was only able to pass EPA tests if it was running an A/F ratio that caused surging.
This is my first EFI BMW (so forgive me if I come across ignorant). But, having owned 3 previous Japanese models with EFI, the rideability change is day and night. 3000 steady RPM on my RC51 would buck you over the bars with a snapped neck. Installed a PCiii and all but gone. Plus, 10 extra HP, better gas mileage and an extra-- I dunno-- 10-15 MPH top end.
Did it pollute the air? the answer can only be YES if compared to that bike in stock form. Compared to an automobile? No-- still way less. Plus, to make the bike rideable, I had to drop to a lower gear, increasing RPM, increasing exhaust, increasing pollutants. So, quite possibly, the PCiii reduced polution in real world driving.
Now, lets not forget Global Warming. The air is cleaner across the country because of pollution controls. Meaning-- less suspended particulates in the air. Less suspended particulates means less filtering of the sun. More sunlight hits the Earth surface, the ground absorbs more heat (we won't mention all the asphalt in California), increasing overall daily temperatures. Cleaner air may also allow more harmful UV rays causing skin cancer.
The real concern here is -- when other states (and they have already begun) see the potential income from actions like this, they too will jump on the bandwagon. Soon, any modification to your bike will be limited to government approved accessories and cost 3-4 times more.

Don't believe me? Ask any German or Brit.

Actually, I do believe that government regulators have public health interests in mind when proposing pollution control policies. The regulators don't get a cut of the fines collected - those go to dedicated accounts or into the government's general fund.

It's not like the private sector where some vice president gets a six figure bonus for figuring out a way to ladle toxic waste into the paint used on children's toys, thus eliminating the need to properly dispose of the waste.

My '02 RT runs just fine in stock form. I'm sorry you can't tune your bike properly to obtain the same results, but that shouldn't give you carte blanc to convert your bike into a machine that spews more pollution than necessary into common resources we all share - air, water, soil, etc.

Yes - motorcycles, on average, pollute less than cars. That doesn't mean we can tinker with our bikes until they pollute the same amount as cars - it means we have an obligation to keep our emissions as low as possible to further mitigate our impact on our environment.

[wozerd]

"Yes - motorcycles, on average, pollute less than cars. That doesn't mean we can tinker with our bikes until they pollute the same amount as cars - it means we have an obligation to keep our emissions as low as possible to further mitigate our impact on our environment"

Did you copy this down from a book or something?
I mean, it sounds rather dogmatic to me. And, you really believe that fines and other such sources of governmental income do not benefit politicians but are put into special accounts? Then-- what are those accounts used for? Possibly to fund depatmental budgets? Which pay salaries to bureaucrats? That need a manager? That needs to be paid a (what was it?? ) 6 figure salary? Who hires contractors, who support the politician with political donations?

Naw-- to far fetched. Never happen-- not in the state of Washington at least!

Look. first it was big polluters, then cars, then trucks. And us motorcyclist were getting 30-70 MPG while cars were getting 10-14. We were saving gas and causing a miniscule amount of the pollution. But, then, bikes got to be big buck business. They actually made money. Worse-- they made a friggin PROFIT!! (notice they went after Dyno Jet not some little company making the same basic product-- why? You might ask yourself).
Now, motorcycles, lawn mowers, barbecue grills and campfires are regulated. One wildfire in California is worth 200 years of back yard barbecues by every inhabitant, non stop in Washington. But, the government now requires you to get a permit and pay a fine (sorry-- FEE) to have a little campfire in your back yard.
Maybe a wildfire in Cali isn't a good example because, we all know that that is due to mankind-- but, it's the best I could come up with. Mt St helens? 300 million metric tons of CO2? Compare that to a 750cc Kawasaki triple being ridden 5000 miles a year! Mt St Helens wins that one!
I have no love for two strokes but-- what mentality bans them but let's government subsidized diesel buses run around spewing hundreds of times the pollutants with 6 persons on board? At least, here in the midwest, that is the average occupancy per bus at any given time.
That is the mentality you defend.
One last thing. I could pour benzene and used oil down the throat of a 1000cc motorcycle at full throttle andif it would stay running, I might approach your comment about tinkering with a bike til it produces as much pollution as a car. Maybe.
1000 cc vs 3500cc? or 5000cc? Simple science (and math)

Your premise is that there are people out there that do not want clean air and clean water. If not for them, then for their children and grandchildren.
I'm sure there are. But-- not at the level you imagine.

Do you worry about the government listening in on your phone conversation? Taking away your liberty? Invading your privacy? If so, why do you relinquish your privacy and freedom to modify a vehicle such as a lawnmower or a motorcycle?
They are both being done in the name of "your safety".
What will you say when MOTOGP is banned or restricted due to pollution? How about being fined for excessive electrcity use? What will you say when they come and insulate your house to reduce carbon emmisions at the power plant-- and tack the cost onto your property tax? Britains are facing that right now. Will you accept it when they tell you you cannot take a joy ride? Frivilous travel laws? That pollutes the air no matter how clean your bike or car runs. But, it pollutes the air when you could be sitting at home.

And, yes-- Kevin, you are right. Occasionally, one does find that a government official does have the public interest at heart. I'm sure the lawmakers thought handicap parking and placards were a great thing. Who knew people would abuse them. Who knew we would have to park 60 feet further away from the health club door because of mandatory handicapped parking spots?
Who knew that due to geography and millions of cars in a major city, that efforts to reduce their emmisions would force a small minority of ecologically friendly vehicles to carry an extra 30LBs of catalytic converters and get so complex that you can't fix them without breaking the law.

Not me!

[OfficerImpersonator]

"Yes - motorcycles, on average, pollute less than cars. That doesn't mean we can tinker with our bikes until they pollute the same amount as cars - it means we have an obligation to keep our emissions as low as possible to further mitigate our impact on our environment"

Did you copy this down from a book or something?

I mean, it sounds rather dogmatic to me. And, you really believe that fines and other such sources of governmental income do not benefit politicians but are put into special accounts? Then-- what are those accounts used for? Possibly to fund depatmental budgets? Which pay salaries to bureaucrats? That need a manager? That needs to be paid a (what was it?? ) 6 figure salary? Who hires contractors, who support the politician with political donations?

No - I thought it up on my own, based upon my education, my experiences working in both the public and private sectors, and my personal beliefs.

Naw-- to far fetched. Never happen-- not in the state of Washington at least!

You live in Medway, Ohio. You have no standing to comment on anything taking place in the State of Washington. What does Washington State have to do with this discussion anyways?

Look. first it was big polluters, then cars, then trucks. And us motorcyclist were getting 30-70 MPG while cars were getting 10-14. We were saving gas and causing a miniscule amount of the pollution. But, then, bikes got to be big buck business. They actually made money. Worse-- they made a friggin PROFIT!! (notice they went after Dyno Jet not some little company making the same basic product-- why? You might ask yourself).
Now, motorcycles, lawn mowers, barbecue grills and campfires are regulated. One wildfire in California is worth 200 years of back yard barbecues by every inhabitant, non stop in Washington. But, the government now requires you to get a permit and pay a fine (sorry-- FEE) to have a little campfire in your back yard.
Maybe a wildfire in Cali isn't a good example because, we all know that that is due to mankind-- but, it's the best I could come up with. Mt St helens? 300 million metric tons of CO2? Compare that to a 750cc Kawasaki triple being ridden 5000 miles a year! Mt St Helens wins that one!

If you're going to manufacture and profit from a product that alters legal equipment into illegal equipment, you had better be prepared for consequences. After all, it's not like the company didn't know that what they were doing increased the emissions of vehicles in which their product was installed...

I have no love for two strokes but-- what mentality bans them but let's government subsidized diesel buses run around spewing hundreds of times the pollutants with 6 persons on board? At least, here in the midwest, that is the average occupancy per bus at any given time.
That is the mentality you defend.
One last thing. I could pour benzene and used oil down the throat of a 1000cc motorcycle at full throttle andif it would stay running, I might approach your comment about tinkering with a bike til it produces as much pollution as a car. Maybe.
1000 cc vs 3500cc? or 5000cc? Simple science (and math)

Your premise is that there are people out there that do not want clean air and clean water. If not for them, then for their children and grandchildren.
I'm sure there are. But-- not at the level you imagine.

Do you worry about the government listening in on your phone conversation? Taking away your liberty? Invading your privacy? If so, why do you relinquish your privacy and freedom to modify a vehicle such as a lawnmower or a motorcycle?
They are both being done in the name of "your safety".
What will you say when MOTOGP is banned or restricted due to pollution? How about being fined for excessive electrcity use? What will you say when they come and insulate your house to reduce carbon emmisions at the power plant-- and tack the cost onto your property tax? Britains are facing that right now. Will you accept it when they tell you you cannot take a joy ride? Frivilous travel laws? That pollutes the air no matter how clean your bike or car runs. But, it pollutes the air when you could be sitting at home.


How big is the engine in the big Triumph? How about the "Boss Hoss"? How about the 106 ci Harley motor? Those engines are all larger than several car engines.

And, yes-- Kevin, you are right. Occasionally, one does find that a government official does have the public interest at heart. I'm sure the lawmakers thought handicap parking and placards were a great thing. Who knew people would abuse them. Who knew we would have to park 60 feet further away from the health club door because of mandatory handicapped parking spots?
Who knew that due to geography and millions of cars in a major city, that efforts to reduce their emmisions would force a small minority of ecologically friendly vehicles to carry an extra 30LBs of catalytic converters and get so complex that you can't fix them without breaking the law.

Not me!

Sorry you hate handicapped parking spots. I think they're useful for those who need them. And not only healthy people go to health clubs. Sometimes people go to health clubs who are rehabilitating from injury or disease. Perhaps those handicapped parking spaces at the gym are utilized by those who need them?

Just because they don't go to the gym at the same time as you doesn't mean they don't exist.

[85138]

Sorry you hate handicapped parking spots. I think they're useful for those who need them. And not only healthy people go to health clubs. Sometimes people go to health clubs who are rehabilitating from injury or disease. Perhaps those handicapped parking spaces at the gym are utilized by those who need them?

Just because they don't go to the gym at the same time as you doesn't mean they don't exist.

Actually interesting that you mentioned that. I'm recovering from a ruptured Achilles tendon and for the first time in my life asked for a temp handicapped sticker. I used it yesterday at the health club. Used it several wks ago at the supermarket while on crutches. So it works for me and I look forward to not needing it in the next few weeks.

[wozerd]

Actually, I do believe that government regulators have public health interests in mind when proposing pollution control policies. The regulators don't get a cut of the fines collected - those go to dedicated accounts or into the government's general fund.

You live in Medway, Ohio. You have no standing to comment on anything taking place in the State of Washington. What does Washington State have to do with this discussion anyways?

I'm sorry, as I read it, the STATE of California brought the suit. Your defense of their actions, coupled with the FACT that you show WASHINGTON as the state you live in, prompted me to jump to that wild conclusion. It was my understanding that we were talking about STATE regulations, not Federal regulations. Ohio required emmisions testing. The Federal Government does not.
California has legislated so many restrictions that auto makers and many motorcycle manufactuers have to build a model specifically for that state.


If you're going to manufacture and profit from a product that alters legal equipment into illegal equipment, you had better be prepared for consequences. After all, it's not like the company didn't know that what they were doing increased the emissions of vehicles in which their product was installed

Apparently you did not ask yourself the question-- so, I'll ask it of you. Why not Techlusion or ThunderMax? They're doing exactly the same thing. Exactly
Only difference-- they would not be able to pay $1 million dollars. That is the ONLY reason.
Does California need money?
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/01/08/state/n103030S80.DTL&type=politics

How big is the engine in the big Triumph? How about the "Boss Hoss"? How about the 106 ci Harley motor? Those engines are all larger than several car engines.

Let's not forget the 48 cylinder chain saw engined motorcycles. Triumph sold a grand total of 10,000 total units in the US in 2006. This is an all time record. That was for ALL Triumphs. 106cid Harleys are still only 1700 or so cc's. I have no clue how many were sold. My point being, how far out do you want to go to refute my point? Should we include the 48 cylinder motorcycle? I compared a 1000cc motorcycle-- a much more common engine displacement. And, one much more likely to be modified.

Sorry you hate handicapped parking spots. I think they're useful for those who need them. And not only healthy people go to health clubs. Sometimes people go to health clubs who are rehabilitating from injury or disease. Perhaps those handicapped parking spaces at the gym are utilized by those who need them

Again, you read into a statement something that is not there. Do I hate handicap parking? No-- why should I? It gives access to those that otherwise would find great difficulty in shopping and other needs. Do we need 48 of them in front of a grocery store? (our local government feels we do). Do people with handicap placards need to park close to a giant box store so they can walk 3 miles inside it? Or, a mall?
I shall assume you have never seen a car pull into a handicapped parking spot only to have the driver get out and walk (if not run) into the store. Until you do, you will not understand the feeling many have to see such abuse.
It was a great idea. Proposed by government officials with their hearts in the right place (but their heads up their--).
The law provides penalties for those that break it. When local, state and federal governments apply the law in a discriminatory fashion after ignoring it for years (knowing full well it was happening) then I can only speculate it was enforced when it became finacially attractive (or when California was 14 billion in the hole).

[sachiwilson]

Didn't I read somewhere that you performed a cannisterectomy on an R-bike? Or do I have you confused with someone else?

Yes, you apparently do. I would not take a canister off any of my bikes.

[sachiwilson]

I shall assume you have never seen a car pull into a handicapped parking spot only to have the driver get out and walk (if not run) into the store. Until you do, you will not understand the feeling many have to see such abuse.

Whoa there. Not everyone who has a disability parking pass needs a wheelchair. Some people have (say) respiratory issues or musculo-skeletal damage that prevent them from walking far. Although I agree that some people manage to get (or use) disabled plates when they don't deserve it, you can't tell just by watching that person for a short while.

[lkchris]

Over the last few years, I've been back to LA a number of times. You can actually see the mountains and the air is noticeably cleaner.


As I understand it, today the biggest source of pollution in LA is ships in the harbor.

Controls are coming.

[wozerd]

Whoa there. Not everyone who has a disability parking pass needs a wheelchair. Some people have (say) respiratory issues or musculo-skeletal damage that prevent them from walking far. Although I agree that some people manage to get (or use) disabled plates when they don't deserve it, you can't tell just by watching that person for a short while.

You mean-- like me? I have circulatory problems (hitting that age). I can't get much past 50 feet before the pain starts. I still do not feel I need a spot by the door. I would rather see a wheel chair or crutch/cane/walker dependant person get that spot. For me it's a discomfort. For them-- it is the difference between independance and being dependant.
And, I do see them-- walk to the back of the store, back and forth through the aisles, to the other side of the store and back. That's easily 200 feet in one direction, plus back and forth through the aisles in the grocery dept. 14 aisles-- lets say they skip a few-- 10 aisles 75 feet long-- thats 750 plus two hundred plus a trip across the store (1000 feet), back and forth through a few aisles-- (take a guess how many feet) and back (500 feet?) over one half a mile (not the three miles I stated) but, still easily a half a mile. But-- they have to park close?
It's more exaggerated in a Mall-- being a California resident, I'm sure our malls here are dimutive compared to yours but ours generally are easily 1/2 mile long and 1/4 mile wide. We have a new "mall" (which is the dumbest thing I have ever seen), modeled after an old fashioned downtown area (the very thing the malls killed-- for the same reasons) that is 4 city blocks square. And, THEY have 64handicapped parking spots!! (Even with the handicapped parking, they have to walk 50 yards to the nearst store.) They have to-- no matter how absurd it may seem, it is the law!
Again, this isn't about the courtesy (mandated as it is) of allowing those with a real handicap to have easy access, this is about NOT giving that privilage, that helping hand, to those that DON'T need it.

All that said-- my RT is stock

I have no intention of modifying the engine. But, I'm thankful I can still do it if I wanted to. I'm also thankful I can buy any windshield I want and the decision is mine-- good or bad. I can replace the seat, buy any tire i want. And, I don't have to pay the added cost of government approval.

And, I want to agree to disagree if we have different viewpoints on a few things. There are many more areas we all agree on.
If, some day, we meet. I want to be able to shake you and everyone elses hand and genuinely mean it when I say "glad to meet you".
Then we can have a few drinks, smoke a cigar and rejoin this debate in earnest.

Knock the street??

[sachiwilson]

And, I want to agree to disagree if we have different viewpoints on a few things. There are many more areas we all agree on.
If, some day, we meet. I want to be able to shake you and everyone elses hand and genuinely mean it when I say "glad to meet you".
Then we can have a few drinks, smoke a cigar and rejoin this debate in earnest.

Knock the street??
It's "hit the road"! :laugh

Sure, I think we agree. Glad to meet you! :)

[kitze2]

And, I want to agree to disagree if we have different viewpoints on a few things. There are many more areas we all agree on.
If, some day, we meet. I want to be able to shake you and everyone elses hand and genuinely mean it when I say "glad to meet you".
Then we can have a few drinks, smoke a cigar and rejoin this debate in earnest.
Knock the street??

A better sentiment I've not seen on any forum in a long time.

Wozerd, I'm Damien. Glad to meet you! I will proudly shake the hand of any man or woman who follows the philosophy established by that great 18th century polemicist....

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
Voltaire,

[wozerd]

A better sentiment I've not seen on any forum in a long time.

Wozerd, I'm Damien. Glad to meet you! I will proudly shake the hand of any man or woman who follows the philosophy established by that great 18th century polemicist....

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
Voltaire,


Thanks Damien! Let's hope that happens.
Dang! Some dude named Voltaire thought that up? And I thought I was being so original!;)
Reminds of of when I invented the V8 engine a few years ago.

But, better to be with those that don't agree than those that simply, don't care!

[kbasa]

Have you ever been to California, wozerd?

[wozerd]

Have you ever been to California, wozerd?

Long-long ago-- I was 6

I have quite a few relatives and friends there
Maybe someday I'll mosey on out there.

[wozerd]

It's "hit the road"! :laugh

Sure, I think we agree. Glad to meet you! :)

Same here.

I'm laughing at myself and my 7th grade French!

Knock the street!!:laugh

DUH!

All those times I have been told that by English speaking women-- you would think I would have caught it.