Sign this

[Nathan]

Loud exhausts are already illegal so why are we debating that??

 

[4T5]

I find the use of eyes solves this issue.
.

Tell that to the Blind **** who was staring straight at me out of his drivers window whilst he pulled out on me sending me over his motor into oncoming traffic not 2 months ago.
You car drivers get a dent, Bike riders lose there lives.

 

[Fr0dders]

Loud exhausts Save lives mate & new bikes sound like electric hairdryers & Cannot be heard by motorists inside there insulated bubble whilst playing Adelle.
Thanks for your misinformed contribution though.

come off it

If somebody is stupid enough to not use his eyes and look where he's going do you really think he's going to have the sense to hear the noise of a motorbike and know where its coming from and take appropriate action ?

Its a BS excuse used to justify wanting overly loud exhausts not designed for road use IMO.

Tell that to the Blind **** who was staring straight at me out of his drivers window whilst he pulled out on me sending me over his motor into oncoming traffic not 2 months ago.
You car drivers get a dent, Bike riders lose there lives.

So your exhaust doesn't help then as idiots still pull out in front of you ?

 

[Kenai]

Tell that to the Blind **** who was staring straight at me out of his drivers window whilst he pulled out on me sending me over his motor into oncoming traffic not 2 months ago.
You car drivers get a dent, Bike riders lose there lives.

So despite him looking directly at you and still pulling out, a louder exhaust would have stopped him doing that?

I don't see how being louder helps in a situation where someone is stupid enough to look straight at you and still elect to pull out straight into your path.

 

[4T5]

In my own personal experience when you come up the side of motorists you can see them hear you before they see you.
My example was just to show that eyes only leads to accidents.

 

[Duke]

That seems to have very little to do with what the petition blabs on about.

It states ABS should be mandatory on bikes over 125cc for new vehicles from 2017 onwards, modifications to a bike deemed dangerous would be banned, expanded emissions tests, on-board diagnostics and easier access to vehicle maintenance information.

I don't see what the issue is?

Me neither.

 

[Kenai]

In my own personal experience when you come up the side of motorists you can see them hear you before they see you.
My example was just to show that eyes only leads to accidents.

I think your example just shows that complete stupidity on the part of motorists leads to accidents, being louder won't stop retards making poor decisions.

 

[4T5]

Maybe so but you cannot get away from the fact that if you ride a bike the louder the exhaust the better as far as being noticed/heard coming etc.
There are legal limits to exhausts as it is & if anybody has an issue with a noisy neighbour then check that the rear box has a approved stamp on it as Race cans will have it Stamped quite clearly on the pipe.

 

[Dogbreath]

Its a BS excuse used to justify wanting overly loud exhausts not designed for road use IMO.

I used to think so, but I do find my Aprilia seems to be noticed by car drivers far more than my (quieter) SV650. I'm constantly amazed when I come up behind people dawdling in the outer lane of dual carriageways and they look in their mirrors and pull over. This almost never happens when I'm driving my car, plenty of people even fail to notice a flash of headlamps.

 

[Shimmyhill]

Having an exhaust under the current noise restriction is not effected by this new law, the person setting the poll is an idiot who gets inspiration from the 'daily mail way to report facts'

Having an exhaust over the current restriction is a anti social thing to do much as it is for a car and in can not in anyway be proven to be safer - same thing to suggest a noisy exhaust could cause someone to be scared and panic and pull out and kill the rider to death all because he had a noisy exhaust.

 

[4T5]

I did indicate in my last post I was talking about Legal cans not illegal race cans but I do think you make a fair point about startling drivers as I've made a fair few jump, In reality how visible I was should have let them know I was there, It's just a sad fact of todays drivers that there insulated bubble seems to make them nonchalant at junctions/changing lanes.

 

[Shimmyhill]

Indeed, the point being that if the exhaust is legal now its legal after this new legislation!

 

[TripleT]

Whoever wrote that petition needs a slap.

Make's bikers look/sound like numpties.

 

[Cookeh]

signed, I really detest these nannying BS laws that the EU want to bring in.

 

[Skeeter]

Indeed, the point being that if the exhaust is legal now its legal after this new legislation!

Good point.

I see nothing in this proposal that is going to lead the way to ban motorbikes, or anything at all worthy of the badly written rant of complete BS that is that petition.

Everyone is just signing a petition based on made up drivel posted on forums by people who haven't even read the proposal. Theres even some beneficial stuff in there, but its all be overlooked so that people can don the "oh my god look at the nanny state ruining out fun" hats. The fact the petition page, and the first couple of pages of Google results yield nothing but made up statements and not even a hint at a link to the actual EU document they are petitioning against says it all to me really. I guarantee that 99% of people on that petition have signed it based solely on what was written on that page.

 

[dessimpson]

signed

 

[Muffin`]

I'm up for a system not too dissimilar to the Japanese or Germans where modifications are passed/registerd with a goverment agency to ensure they don't take the **** with noise

 

[ChrisD.]

^ I like the idea of that.

 

[act smiley]

The sections referenced are below.

18.2.a can easily be read in this way actually - it seems to reference "safety" as including anything that increases power/speed beyond manufacturer's statistics.

The other one that's a bit confusing is 52.b - this seems to mean that non-type approved items can be manufactured for race purposes, only they can't be sold to the general public at all even with that caveat?

What type approval for aftermarket parts consists of seems to be mentioned as "we'll decide that later".

So actually it does look a little concerning to my admittedly non-lawyer eyes, though the scacemongering, border-line illiterate petition certainly isn't doing anyone any favours.

Article 18
Measures regarding modifications to the powertrain of vehicles
1.
‘Powertrain’ means the components and systems of a vehicle that generate power and deliver it to the road surface, including the engine(s), the engine management systems or any other control module, the pollution control devices, the transmission and its control, either a drive shaft or belt drive or chain drive, the differentials, the final drive, and the driven wheel tyre (radius).
2.
L-category vehicles shall be equipped with designated measures to prevent tampering of a vehicle's powertrain, to be laid down in a delegated act by means of a series of technical requirements and specifications with the aim:
(a)
to prevent modifications that may prejudice safety, in particular by increasing vehicle performance through tampering with the powertrain in order to increase the maximum torque and/ or power and/or maximum designed vehicle speed as declared by the manufacturer of a vehicle upon type-approval, and/or
(b)
to prevent damage to the environment.
3.
The Commission shall lay down the specific requirements regarding the measures referred to in paragraph 2 by means of a delegated act adopted in accordance with Articles 76, 77 and 78.
4.
After a modification of the powertrain, a vehicle shall comply with the technical requirements of the initial vehicle category and subcategory, or, if applicable, the new vehicle category and subcategory, which were in force when the original vehicle was sold, registered or entered into service, including the latest amendments to the requirements.



Article 52
functioning of essential systems
Systems, components or separate technical units that may pose a significant risk to the correct functioning of systems that are essential for the safety of the vehicle or for its environmental performance may not be sold, registered or enter into service shall be prohibited unless they have been authorised by an approval authority in accordance with paragraph 4 and Article 53(1) and (2).
The Commission shall establish a list of the systems, components or separate technical units covered by paragraph 1 by means of delegated acts in accordance with Articles 76, 77 and 78, taking account of available information on the following:
(a)
the seriousness of the risk to the safety or environmental performance of vehicles fitted with the systems, components or separate technical units in question;
(b)
the effect on consumers and after-market manufacturers of the imposition under this Article of a possible authorisation requirement for systems, components or separate technical units.
‘Original components’ are vehicle parts manufactured according to the specifications and production standards provided by the vehicle manufacturer for the production of components for the assembly of the vehicle in question, including those components which are manufactured on the same production line as these components, and, based on a rebuttable presumption, components for which the manufacturer certifies that they match the quality of the components used for the assembly of the vehicle in question and have been manufactured according to the specifications and production standards of the vehicle manufacturer; the same applies to separate technical units.
Paragraph 1 shall not apply to original systems, components or separate technical units and to systems, components or separate technical units that are type-approved in accordance with the provisions of one of the acts listed in Annex II, except where the approval relates to aspects other than those covered in paragraph 1.
Paragraph 1 shall not apply to systems, components or separate technical units produced for vehicles intended exclusively for racing on roads. If systems, components or separate technical units on a list in a delegated act to this Regulation have a dual use, for vehicles intended exclusively for racing on roads and for vehicles intended for use on public roads, they may not be sold or offered for sale to consumers.

The Commission shall, to the extent necessary, lay down the model and numbering system for the certificate referred to in third subparagraph of Article 53(1) as well as all aspects relating to the procedure by means of implementing act in accordance with Article 73. The Commission, shall lay down the requirements which such components must fulfil, the marking, packaging and the appropriate tests by means of delegated acts in accordance Articles 76, 77 and 78.
The requirements referred to in paragraph 4 may be based on the acts listed in Annex II or may consist of a comparison of the system, component or separate technical unit with the performance of the original vehicle, or of any of its parts, as appropriate. In either case the requirements shall ensure that the systems, components or separate technical units do not impair the functioning of those systems that are essential for the safety of the vehicle or its environmental performance.


Article 53
functioning of essential systems — related requirements
For the purposes of Article 52(1), the manufacturer of systems, components or separate technical units shall submit to the approval authority a test report drafted by a designated technical service which certifies that the systems, components or separate technical units for which authorisation is sought comply with the requirements referred to in Article 52(4). The manufacturer may submit only one application per type per part to only one approval authority.
The application shall include details of the manufacturer of the systems, components or separate technical units, the type, identification and part numbers of the systems, components or separate technical units, the vehicle manufacturer’s name, type of vehicle and, if appropriate, year of construction or any other information permitting the identification of the vehicle to which the systems, components or separate technical units are to be fitted.
When the approval authority is satisfied, taking account of the test report and other evidence, that the systems, components or separate technical units in question comply with the requirements referred to in Article 52(4), it shall issue a certificate to the manufacturer without delay. This certificate shall authorise the systems, components or separate technical units to be sold and the entry into service in the Union subject to the second subparagraph of paragraph 2.
The manufacturer shall inform without delay the approval authority that issued the certificate of any change affecting the conditions under which it was issued. That approval authority shall decide whether the certificate has to be reviewed or reissued and whether further tests are necessary.
The manufacturer shall be responsible for ensuring that the systems, components or separate technical units are produced and continue to be produced under the conditions under which the certificate was issued.
Before delivering any authorisation, the approval authority shall verify the existence of satisfactory arrangements and procedures for ensuring effective control of conformity of production.

 

[Muffin`]

^ I like the idea of that.

start a petition?

'hi,

please copy JASMA, so we can get rid of rudeboys in 4 pots making my house shake and whiteys making my ears bleed as they speed past on their twist n' go's.

thanks,

Chris

(P.S. signup to type-r-owners.co.uk to discuss this further)'