Cognitive dissonance - Performance mods vs public policy

[ninjabadger]

So here I sit with my 99% stock bike lusting after an Area-P exhaust system. I like the idea of a nicer exhaust note and a few extra hp would certainly be groovy.

On the flip side, the policy wonk and ecologist in me is opposed to removing the factory components as doing so would eliminate the catalytic converters that reduce criteria pollutant emissions. It gets even worse when I consider that properly tuning the bike with an aftermarket system will require rejetting, upping the fuel consumption and further increasing the level of pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions.

While the magnitude of my marginal contribution to overall emissions is small (whether looking at just MY total footprint or that of the community, state or nation) if everyone did the same thing the negative externalities start to pile up, undermining the public policy goals of mandating catalytic converters or emission standards in the first place.

This isn't a commentary on all of you who have done performance mods. Rather, as someone who will shortly aiming to make a living in energy and environmental policy, I am incredibly conflicted, not only regarding my own choices, but also how to properly design environmental policies when I know you yahoos are going to be tearing off all the emission control devices my policies mandate

But I still like the vroom vroom and zoom zoom...

[greg737]

id, ego, and super ego in disagreement?

Most human plans of action (both personal and governmental) boil down to "everyone hold still and do as I say (not as I do) while I get what I want."

Why should you be any different? Put the Area P on and enjoy. Take long rides on the weekends. That'll give you time to think up some really good environmental policies. Then jump in the Prius on Monday morning, drive to work and put together some killer PowerPoint slides.

By the way, I love my Area P (on my 2005 EX-250). I got it with the long-quiet stainless steel can. Install was a breeze, it looks great, and the long-quiet option isn't obnoxious.

I installed the Area P as part of my fuel injection conversion process. I've wondered whether my bike has better or worse emissions now that it's fuel injected vs. when it was 100% stock on carbs.

[Snake]

Everyone has to make there own choiceswhen it comes to 'bending" the rules. When you do not make the rules it's a lot easier to question them and decide to adhere to them or not.

You are in a bit of a quandre being that you are the rule maker. Since you make the rules you have to decide for yourself whether or not to lead by example. If you do not then you need to ask yourself whether those rules are worth making and enforcing.

California has discovered that some aftermarket mods actualy improve fuel efficiency and reduce emissions. To those products they issue a C.A.R.B. number.

That's just my two cents worth.

[Rayme]

Remove everything you want, it would be true if everyone did it, it would have an effect. But the truth and facts is that people who remove emission equipment probably is 0.01 % of the population driving vehicles. So...one small 250cc engine put putting making a difference? Uh, remove away!

[Sailariel]

Corey, I see where you are coming from. It sounds to me that you are taking your job seriously--you walk the walk and talk the talk, unlike Mr. Gore with his huge swimming pool, in his huge house with lots of lights, and his gas guzzling SUV. I like to think of myself as a bit of an environmentalist. We recently got a more efficient furnace, insulated the hell out of the house, converted to all compact flourescents, etc. We also planted a lot of trees on our acre of land. As for the bike, I left it alone. I did some cosmetic stuff that personalized the machine, but did not change jets or exhaust. True it is a challenge to eke out the last bit of power out of a 250, but those changes are also against the law. Kawa went to great length to be able to get its bike certified. I don`t feel that I know more than their engineers and could build more performance into the bike and still stay certifiable. If I needed more performance, I would buy a 650 or a Yamaha 600.

[ninjabadger]

In all fairness I don't make the laws yet but that's the plan after grad school is done this spring. I can just imagine someone at DOT or USEPA reading through these motorcycle forums and banging their head against the wall in frustration . Who knows, maybe that'll be me in a couple years. It's always fun listening to people rail against "the man" since becoming "the man" is my career goal.

[Apex]

Just think of this. You ride a 250. Most of the rest of the people in the US ride 600's and 1000's or 1200+cc cruisers. Average MPG of those bikes are in the low 30's to low 40's typically. Yet you ride a 250 that can squeeze out 60+mpg. Not to mention you don't use the same amount of oil or coolant that the other bikes use. You don't have many exotic components on your bike that are made out of rare materials. You have a steel frame, aluminum engine, simple and sweet. So even if you put exhaust on it, I think you will still be on top of just about everyone else.

Oh, and should I mention Harley's with straight pipes??? 1200+cc's and no catalytic? Or the several performance car people out there that have blown v8's, offroad mid-pipes and loud mufflers getting a whopping 10-15mpg??? Or the street driven turbo diesel trucks that never see a trailer in their lifetime?

I think you are ok my friend.

[ninjabadger]

There's always my Expedition which gets like 12 mpg. But that might be because the only time I really drive it is when there's snow on the ground or if I have big crap I need to haul. The rest of the time I ride a scooter or motorcycle.

This is just me being obsessive. I had the same internal conflict when I bought our scooters. We got Genuine Buddy 50s with 2-stroke motors when I could have spent more and bought Yamaha C3s which have fuel injected four strokes. For me upgrading to the bike was 75% a reptilian brain decision but the other 25% was knowing that I would only get slightly less in the mpg department because I have to ride the scoot WFO for almost my entire commute to keep up with traffic and I would be able to ride places on the 250 I had previously had to take the Expedition. Plus 2 strokes are dirty (although soooo pretty sounding). You guys are right that on net I'm definitely ahead of the curve but its the slightly ocd part of me that abhors giving up any of the gains I've made.

I'll probably just suck it up at some point though and start tweaking.

[rockNroll]

Cognitive dissonance <-- you lost me there


I say go with a slip on... you'll still have your cats. Get your jetting done so that the bike runs proper and think about this... an engine that runs too lean pollutes too (high nox). You might make less pollution after the changes even if you consume a little bit more fuel. My bike was pretty lean from the factory

Now go getcha that slip on!

[HKr1]

Originally Posted by rockNroll

I say go with a slip on... you'll still have your cats!

Well, you'll have atlest one cat left with a slip-on.

Screw that anyway, there not even real cats. Go for the full system

[noche_caliente]

I'm there with you Corey - that's one of the reasons that I haven't upgraded the exhaust just yet - that and the price tag. Good luck with your decision

[Sailariel]

I guess I am "Old School", and like Old Guy said in another thread, when you get to our age, we say what we mean. It is against the law to alter an exhaust system on any motor vehicle--especially removing the catalytic converter. Most of us on this forum, including me, are not engineers. How much we would contribute to pollution is something I am clueless about. Just because "everybody is doing it", does not, in my view, make it ok. We are supposedly a society that abides by the laws of the country. Obeying only laws that we agree with, again, in my view, does not cut it. I graduated from college in 1966 during the time the war in Vietnam was escalating. At that time we had the draft. I, basically, had three choices: Go to Canada, Go to jail, or Go into the service. Legally, I did not meet the criteria for conscientious objector. I obeyed the law, and went into the service. After I got in, I realized that this Vietnam thing was going to go on for a while, so I availed myself of the very best training available so that I would have some semblance of survival. I went to Ranger school and became an Airborne Ranger Medic. I went to Vietnam and lived to tell about it even though I got on the wrong end of an AK-47. Later--much later--2004, I developed cancer secondary to Agent Orange exposure. I never regretted my choice. I followed the law of the land and paid my dues to be a citizen of this great nation. Today we are not asked to make such draconian decisions. There is no draft. The youth of today is not asked to contribute anything to their country. It is all voluntary. We have the Peace Corps, VISTA (did a year of that), and the military. That`s about it. Given all of the above, Do you think that I will remove the cat converter on my Ninja or my car because I want it to sound "nice", which is purely subjective and against the law? No, It is not a big deal, and a Ninjette without a cat converter will not make a significant dent in the ozone layer, so a lot of people prefer the sound and the miniscule HP attained by tweaking. After a while that adds up---at least in terms of how seriously we regard our laws. Surely, had I chosen to run off to Canada or Sweden, it would not have changed the outcome of the war--but it would have affected quite a few families who did not have their son come home in a box because of my skills as a medic. Sure, I can rationalize that there would have been another medic there if I was not there--but there is no way I can know that. Was that medic as skilled as I was? Was he more skilled? Who knows? I could make myself crazy by dwelling on "suppose if". I did what I had to do and have no regrets. I can also say that I am proud of my service. My belief is , and will continue to be, that if we have laws in this nation, these laws need to be obeyed. This is not a Buffet where we can pick and choose what we want to obey and what we want to disregard. The alternative is a society subject to fads and whatever people want to do, without a system of law and order. There is a good chance, at my age, that I will not see the bottomn of this downward spiral. End of philosophical discourse.

[ninjabadger]

The fun flame bait question though is this: Is stricter enforcement a preferable solution as far as total social wellbeing is concerned? I don't know. To a certain extent, laws are only as good as the enforcement mechanism. There obviously isn't any soft mechanism that works (social pressure, cultural norms etc) since the majority motorcycling culture is geared towards modifications, sport bikes and cruisers alike (and cars too for that matter). And hard enforcement mechanisms, while they technically exist (citations and the like) are either not used, not used enough, or are not harsh enough. While I agree that ideally laws should be followed simply because one follows the rules set forth (assuming fair, accountable institutions, blah, blah, etc), at the end of the day realism dictates that's not really gonna get the job done. So what will? These are genuine questions I grapple with daily, currently in an academic context, but all to soon I'll be playing with live ammo. This seemingly idiotic question of "to mod or not to mod" is merely representative of larger policy issues and real life personal choices. Laws and institutions should be structured to facilitate people making the choices that are best for society. That being the case what are the best alternatives for making things better going forward?

[Sailariel]

I don`t have an answer to that, Cory. I do know, that right now where we live, we have a Code Enforcement Officer who does not enforce building codes or any other codes for that matter. We have people diverting streams on their property because they dont like the direction it is going. One such stream got diverted so that our whole lower garden is under water and trees we have planted are literally drowning. When called about this situation, his response was, "What is, is" We called DEP and their response was that they are underfunded and too busy. My question is this. What is the point of having laws and regulations if they are tacitly ignored? It starts with little things and escalates into big stuff. Who says that part of owning a sportbike is doing mods, legal or not? Ditto cars. It is a fad fueled by the motorsports industry and press so that they can make money. It`s all about greed and we are supposed to be the patsys buying their hype. I think I`ll leave my bike as it is. It is already the best performing 250 on the market. You are currently in an academic setting. I have gone as far as a Master`s Degree. When was the last time you saw a course in Ethics offered in a university?

[bikeguy57]

Good stuff!

[ninjabadger]

Figured this thread for permanently buried.

For those who might be wondering, I'm still running the bike as stock in the engine/exhaust department and am likely going to undo the fender eliminator so i can put on a Ventura Rack. I occasionally hear a bike with a tastefully done aftermarket pipe and have a twinge of lust, but I find that I'm overall pretty content with the bike's farty little exhaust note. Also, I'm sure that my neighbors appreciate the quiet.

[sixer]

Originally Posted by greg737

id, ego, and super ego in disagreement?

Most human plans of action (both personal and governmental) boil down to "everyone hold still and do as I say (not as I do) while I get what I want."

Why should you be any different? Put the Area P on and enjoy. Take long rides on the weekends. That'll give you time to think up some really good environmental policies. Then jump in the Prius on Monday morning, drive to work and put together some killer PowerPoint slides.

By the way, I love my Area P (on my 2005 EX-250). I got it with the long-quiet stainless steel can. Install was a breeze, it looks great, and the long-quiet option isn't obnoxious.

I installed the Area P as part of my fuel injection conversion process. I've wondered whether my bike has better or worse emissions now that it's fuel injected vs. when it was 100% stock on carbs.

EERRrr? How much did fuel injection cost?

[kkim]

Originally Posted by ninjabadger

Figured this thread for permanently buried.

For those who might be wondering, I'm still running the bike as stock in the engine/exhaust department and am likely going to undo the fender eliminator so i can put on a Ventura Rack. I occasionally hear a bike with a tastefully done aftermarket pipe and have a twinge of lust, but I find that I'm overall pretty content with the bike's farty little exhaust note. Also, I'm sure that my neighbors appreciate the quiet.

Enjoy, Corey!

[headshrink]

When I saw your title, I thought it was a research proposal for your dissertation.

[Sailariel]

Corey, I really think that you have it together. People like you are our future and I see good things happening. Thank you. This really means a lot.

[Flashmonkey]

Originally Posted by ninjabadger

I am incredibly conflicted, not only regarding my own choices, but also how to properly design environmental policies when I know you yahoos are going to be tearing off all the emission control devices my policies mandate

You sound young. When you finally get to the position you want, you'll soon find that policies aren't mandated with the best interests of humanity in mind.

Regarding your decision on whether or not to modify your exhaust: that can only be your decision. As a well educated, fully functional adult, it is your responsibility to take it upon yourself to measure out the pros and cons of that decision and decide accordingly...or not. The bottom line is whether or not you can live with the perceived ramifications of what you have decided to undertake. That's all you can really be held accountable for.

Good luck.