Tue May 27 19:05:15 1997 - Message No. 930
From: Jorn Ronnow

Subject: Re: Rumour or true stories ??


At 14:21 97-05-27 +0100, Rob wrote:
>Jorn Ronnow wrote:
>
>> The REAL reason for new noice regulations is not noice: Their purpose
>> is to
>> outlaw motor bikes altogether.
>
>Rubbish, if they wanted to Ban motorcycles, they would have banned them,
>Motorcyclists give the law makers plenty of opportunity to get bans put
>in place, so they wouldn't have needed much of an excuse to go ahead and
>do it.

They can't do it just like that, because it would be too big a step, and as
such noticed and debated. The smarter strategy is to do it step by step,
each step being too small to get attention. 

>> Most bikes today can not handle the new
>> noice regs with the engine SWITCHED OFF!! The road noice and
>> mechanical
>> noice from the chain is higher.
>
>Rubbish, most motorcycles on sale today can meet the proposed 80dB
>limit.

I don't know what source you have, but they apparently have different
measuring equipment than the Swedish MOT. Or maybe they forgot the fact
that the bike must be moving while measuring?

>> The -96 @ even had padding under the tank to silence resonance noice
>> form
>> the tank. Can anyone hear the tank resonance?
>Take your helmet off and your ear plugs out, then stand at the side of
>the road and get someone to ride an @ passed, with and without the
>silencing pad and come back and let us know.

Anyone that can here the difference between a -95 and a -96 @ with the same
pipe is welcome to share his/her experiences with the rest of us.

>> >Enginers will compensate for it.
>>
>> I don't think they do a very good job: I just ran out of silencer
>> padding
>> in my flow through tuning pipe. Since I beleive that "loud is out", I
>> changed to the original pipe until I can get more padding. There is a
>> notable difference in vibrations and the engine must be revved higher
>> with
>> the original pipe.
>
>Ahh, so your one of the mokeys with a noisy pipe who has caused the
>politicians to legislate against us!

So many hallmarks of a politician in just one sentence:
1) Answering, but avoiding the core issue (which was inadequate
compensation for silencingon the @).
2) Being ignorant of, or ignoring, key information and making up for it by
constructing or extrapolating "new" facts (in short: Have you heard my bike?)
3) Unable to come with up actual arguments, an attempt is made to shift the
focus to a personal level, by making an attack on the counterpart (or
"monkey"). Usually, this encourages reciprocity (the "monkey" reinforces
the shift to the personal level), but let's spare Micha the trouble.

(Definitions from Sabini's "Social Psychology", Pensylvania University)

>The engineers will give us the power back, if we are prepared to go out
>and pay for. I suggest you vist your local Honda Dealer and try and get
>a ride on a Super Blackbird. Fitted with 80dB exhaust pipes it can still
>hit 180+mph.

I doubt that the production of the Blackbird will cure the extra vibrations
and lower tourque caused by the original @ muffler. See 1) above.

>> > Does anybody complains about catalytic/injection cars ?
>>
>> Unfortunately, catalytic conversion halted the promising "lean
>> burn"-technology, far advanced at Ford. The car makers disguised the
>> loss
>> of engine efficiency on paper, by increasing the top revs, lowering
>> the
>> torque level and moving the tourqe up in the rev range. This may be
>> why the
>> cars are just as thirsty today, as they were in the pre-catalytic era.
>
>Why not buy a Diesel then? It is a lean burn engine, a far leaner burn
>engine than anything that was proposed with the Spark Ingnition motors.
>Try the new Audi/VW range of direct injection engines as an excellent
>starting point.

Why not? Because the punitive taxes make them more expensive to run than
their petrol counterparts, for the average driver. Also, while one of the
key points with lean burn is low emissions. Diesels have high emissions.
Emission control constitutes 40% percent of the manufacturing cost of a
diesel, and they weren't cheap to build in the first place. Without
punitive taxes, TDI diesels would start to make real sense.

>> >Governments are making safe, acident-free, full-controlled world for
>> us !
>> >You will not tell me that you disagree with that ;;;-))))
>>
>> See George Orwell, "1984". (Yes, I did see your smiley :-)  )
>
>Hmmmh, are you standing in the leadership contest for the British
>Conservative party, its us British who are supposed to Euro sceptic.

And it is the British MEPs who stopped the EU power limitation madness.
Scepticism is good for health and diversity.

>Yours not needing to slide.

Come to the Rinkaby meeting, and see how addictive it is!
(http://hem.passagen.se/tenere)

Keep sliding
-Jorn



|------------------------------------------------------|
| This mail was posted on the Africa Twin Mailing List |
|      More info at: http://home.pages.de/~atic/       |
|------------------------------------------------------|

dipper@normans.isd.uni-stuttgart.de