We listened, now kindly naff off...

[Oscar]

eh? The thread is titled:

"We listened, now kindly naff off..."

My actual point was how the LTSA have handled the issue, although my closing comment was indeed:

"I don't know about you fellas, but I think seeing as we're hard enough for cage drivers to SEE, I would also like to give them an opportunity to possibly HEAR me coming before they cut me off."

Hardly an attempt at making some sort of rash generalisation like 'loud bikes save lives'.

Some people posted examples of where they felt the noise was, in at least a partial factor, the reason an accident was avoided.

So are you discussing a statement which hasn't even been stated?

It was stated - I said it.
At least three people alluded to collision avoidance or letting other road user hear you using loud pipes. Your own statement "..give them an opportunity to possibly HEAR me coming before they cut me off." is a generalisation, and very close to oft repeated "Loud pipes saves lives".

As a safety policy it is patently stupid - it presupposes that you are making enough noise for them to hear, and that "they" are in a position to hear you coming. As someone else stated, if this is used as a justification for loud pipes, how are "they" gonna hear your particular exhaust over the din?

Do you actually think that the LTSA is going to take a propositon like that seriously?

Yes, I know I've been taking the piss, but there is a serious intent. The fact is that this sort of regulation/legislation only goes one way, against us. We can lose our rights slowly or fast, it's up to us - if we self regulate and try to avoid pissing people off, we'll get to keep the status quo for longer.

[Drunken Monkey]

You presume again, and you presume wrong.

The team I was involved in was specifically pushing the idea that exhaust noises were measured with a metering device under certain conditions. We were also pushing for consistency of application of the law across the board, pointing out that buses were one of the worst 'noise pollution' offenders. We submitted actual, metered examples of everyday situations.

Our focus had nothing to do with using loud exhausts as safety precaution. That is, as I said just moments ago, merely something that some people have related stories of actual situations they have been in to tell about on this thread.

[Oscar]

You presume again, and you presume wrong.

The team I was involved in was specifically pushing the idea that exhaust noises were measured with a metering device under certain conditions. We were also pushing for consistency of application of the law across the board, pointing out that buses were one of the worst 'noise pollution' offenders. We submitted actual, metered examples of everyday situations.

Our focus had nothing to do with using loud exhausts as safety precaution. That is, as I said just moments ago, merely something that some people have related stories of actual situations they have been in to tell about on this thread.

I didn't presume anything. You said:

I don't know about you fellas, but I think seeing as we're hard enough for cage drivers to SEE, I would also like to give them an opportunity to possibly HEAR me coming before they cut me off.

So did you not mean that the way it reads?
Are you not advocating loud pipes as a safety device?
How loud?
Louder than cars?
Buses?

[Two Smoker]

It was stated - I said it.
At least three people alluded to collision avoidance or letting other road user hear you using loud pipes. Your own statement "..give them an opportunity to possibly HEAR me coming before they cut me off." is a generalisation, and very close to oft repeated "Loud pipes saves lives".

As a safety policy it is patently stupid - it presupposes that you are making enough noise for them to hear, and that "they" are in a position to hear you coming. As someone else stated, if this is used as a justification for loud pipes, how are "they" gonna hear your particular exhaust over the din?

Do you actually think that the LTSA is going to take a propositon like that seriously?

Yes, I know I've been taking the piss, but there is a serious intent. The fact is that this sort of regulation/legislation only goes one way, against us. We can lose our rights slowly or fast, it's up to us - if we self regulate and try to avoid pissing people off, we'll get to keep the status quo for longer.

Yep i have to agree with most of that, i dont see a loud exhuast as a safety device, my situation was just an extreme example where it could be...... Personally i would have a larger exhaust not to look or sound cool, but to have the added HP in the upper rev range.....

[Coldkiwi]

oscar... just go bother some poor soul you work with already instead of arguing in circles and wasting everyones time.

if you are trying to argue that theres no point in even considering a potential afety affect of being able to hear an approaching vehicle, then we should give up arguing because you've clearly lost your mind... either that or you're completely deaf and you have never experienced vehicle noise.

Your last statements could also be applied to headlights being on... a safety device which presumably relies on the drivers being in a position to see the headlight and lighting conditions that would allow them to differentiate between sunlight/reflection/headlight. Sure, thats not always the case... which is why a change in noise MIGHT (if it saves some poor sods life or limbs, why not??) alert the driver to the presence of a bike.

stop trying to have your cake and eat it too.

[Drunken Monkey]

1. Yes, _exactly_ as it reads. 'possibly' and 'given an opportunity' completely change the tone of the statement. Too bad for you if you can't see that or wish to disagree.

2. Nope. See 1.

3. Not more than x number of Decibels from y meters away from the exhaust of a vehicle at z number of rpm. I can't remember the specifics = would you like to read a boring report? I can probably request a copy...

4. Ideally, yes for bikes, but this possibly wouldn't be considered 'fair' (although that has never stopped the LTSA). However, bikes and cars are limited by different engineering constraints - weight, position, length of pipe. In practice, bikes are louder than cars because of these design factors.

5. Hell no, those things are permanent-hearing-damage loud. And stinky. And I saw an ambo and a cop at the bus stop yesterday as one of those f**kwit bus drivers had clipped a pedestrian = but that's another post.

[Oscar]

oscar... just go bother some poor soul you work with already instead of arguing in circles and wasting everyones time.

if you are trying to argue that theres no point in even considering a potential afety affect of being able to hear an approaching vehicle, then we should give up arguing because you've clearly lost your mind... either that or you're completely deaf and you have never experienced vehicle noise.

Your last statements could also be applied to headlights being on... a safety device which presumably relies on the drivers being in a position to see the headlight and lighting conditions that would allow them to differentiate between sunlight/reflection/headlight. Sure, thats not always the case... which is why a change in noise MIGHT (if it saves some poor sods life or limbs, why not??) alert the driver to the presence of a bike.

stop trying to have your cake and eat it too.

Bullshit.
Your analogy would be correct if headlights being on had the potential to piss people off or was anti-social in some way...but it isn't, is it?

My case is simple - the more of us riding around with noisy pipes (justify them how you like), the sooner and harsher will be the legislation to quieten us down.

As for your justification that it might save someone (and I have yet to see a case where it did more than a good quality horn would have achieved), down that road lies ruin, because argue it how you like, Joe Average and his MP is simply not gonna wear it...

Ps. As for wasting "everyones" time, you'll find as many agreeing with me as not. Who died and made you God?

[dangerous]

What a bunch of dorks.

Here you are, crapping on about letting car drivers hear you (and how loud would your exhaust have to be, pray tell, to penetrate the environs of the average newish car?), so as to know you're there. Yeah right...

In the meantime, the poor bastids behind you in traffic, and those living nearby, have to put up with the noise. Result? Motorcycles become more marginalised as people get fed up.

Me, I hate hotted up Rotaries.
Why?
'Cause there's a couple in my neighbourhood and they're noisy little anti-social backward cap wearing retards whose arse I'd kick soon as look at 'em....problem is, I never see them - I just HEAR them as they go home late at night. If my local politician wanted my opinion as to what to do with loud exhausts on cars, I'd be hard pressed not to recommend capital punishment.

So please, don't gimme this "Loud pipes saves lives" shit. It's bullshit and you know it - all it's doing is making sure the legislation comes sooner and is more draconian.

Ohh...... whatever,
get over it, the only 'bullshit around here seems to be comming out of your............. sounds like you have a real problem with getting along with people
'chill out man'

[Motu]

Come down and use my decibel meter if you like - you won't be able to get any reading that means anything.As I've mentioned on threads of this subject going way back,it's just not possible in a valid testing situation.But yes,if you push hard enough they will enforce the original compliance specification,then you will know everything is correct and ticketyboo.

[Oscar]

Come down and use my decibel meter if you like - you won't be able to get any reading that means anything.As I've mentioned on threads of this subject going way back,it's just not possible in a valid testing situation.But yes,if you push hard enough they will enforce the original compliance specification,then you will know everything is correct and ticketyboo.

Touchy bunch here, Motu.
Wouldnae last five minutes at JM...



We should organise a ride up the Coromandel or summat...?

[Oscar]

Ohh...... whatever,
get over it, the only 'bullshit around here seems to be comming out of your............. sounds like you have a real problem with getting along with people
'chill out man'

Gee, thanks for that.
I hadn't realised that it was against the rules to disagree with people.
If we add your "whatever" attitude to the "Loud pipes are safe" attitude, we end with nobody taking us seriously. That way leads to disaster...

[merv]

I stick to standard exhausts on my bikes and wouldn't have it any other way and would not see a safety benefit in making a whole lot of noise but I sure as hell understand the noise of some people's bikes pisses off many members of the public and I think that its a bad idea.

I chuckle at times at the hypocrisy espoused in Kiwi Rider at times, they rave on quite strongly about the need for dirt bikes to be quiet so as to protect our available riding areas blah blah blah and they slate manufacturers whose bikes they say are noisy, and in the next breath they recommend/condone the fitting of noisy pipes to road bikes just like a whole lot of you on here seem to think is a good idea.

Not me, I wear earplugs as it is to keep the wind noise at bay in my helmet and basically cannot hear my VFR running hardly when I ride it and that's the way I like it.

p.s. I'm like the AA guy at Toyota Thames - I can say what I like. I don't care who disagrees or agrees with who here, as long as you have an opinion its better than no opinion

[dangerous]

Gee, thanks for that.
I hadn't realised that it was against the rules to disagree with people.
If we add your "whatever" attitude to the "Loud pipes are safe" attitude, we end with nobody taking us seriously. That way leads to disaster...

Mate, theres nothing wrong with disagreeing thats healthy, its the name calling thats not needed, call me a 'dork' and any of the other dribble that you wrote to my face, but not on line, if you have meet me then I'd proberly accept it also, but you havent.


Now to me it seems that its not 'loud' pipes thats the problem but the very FEW that treat these pipes with no respect or consideration for others, so we the marjority well have it rewened by the minority again.
Post #55 "ColdKiwi' sums it all up very well.

[dangerous]

In the time that it took me to write up my last post (2 finger style) it started raining...... I live on SH/W1 in a 60k zone, before the rain started the noise was a quite drone now that it is wet out, the noise has esculated to a loud racket. I can now here it over the TV..... so should 'rain' be banned....... Na, that would be stupid aye 'silly me'

Weres it gona end, I cant even play bat n ball with my dog at the park any more he has to be on a lead at all times.....sad realy.
Live and let live.

[merv]

Weres it gona end, I cant even play bat n ball with my dog at the park any more he has to be on a lead at all times.....sad realy.
Live and let live.

Yep all starts with the irresponsible few abusing their privileges and all of a sudden we all have these extra laws imposed on the many. Remember my words suggesting things like this happen when debating the Chris Parkin case.

So to all the people on here that want to use and abuse the environment with noisy pipes, go right ahead but don't come crying back if the bureaucrats tighten the laws further and you have to go and pay money to get your bikes compliant. I will just smile.