4 ms·
I can't understand why the enforced decibel level is 95 for cars and 80 for motorcycles. Motorcycles are probably, by percentage, the worst offenders for this,
by karaterobot 5y ago
I can't understand why the enforced decibel level is 95 for cars and 80 for motorcycles. Motorcycles are probably, by percentage, the worst offenders for this, but it seems like a decibel from one vehicle is as loud as a decibel from another, so I wonder why there's a double standard.
The biggest argument against this seems to be the creeping surveillance state. I agree with that, and it would indeed be better if this was enforced by 'old-fashioned' police and their old-fashioned ears. But they don't, for whatever reason, and I wish they would. It's frustrating.
And it's not that I like being surveilled, but I think speed trap cameras and red light cameras are generally worse than this (because you can accidentally go over the speed limit, but you can't accidentally install a loud aftermarket exhaust pipe) so this isn't as much of a problem for me as it seems for some people.
At one level I'll even appreciate the sweet revenge on the inconsiderate people whose unnecessarily loud vehicles have been annoying me for decades.
- robonerd 5y agoI think the limit should be the same for both, but I bet the difference is motivated by the pack behavior of motorcyclists. Loud cars usually travel alone, but loud motorcycles often travel in packs of dozens which may continue passing your house for a minute or two, which feels like an hour...
- kube-system 5y agoA group of 90 decibel bikes is not going to sound anywhere near like a bunch of straight piped Harleys inside you house. It will sound like you’re next to a hair salon. Hair dryers are 90 decibel.
- robonerd 5y agoAs I said, 95 decibels seems like a reasonable enough limit for motorcycles. But I suspect lower limit for motorcycles is motivated by people getting fed up with motorcyclists particularly. The worst motorcyclists have earned a horrible reputation for all motorcyclists, I think this lower limit is a consequence of that.
- kube-system 5y agoI think it was just because they generally made less noise when the regulation was enacted in 1972. Car design has changed a lot since then to make them a lot quieter. Bikes have changed relatively little.
- robonerd 5y agoIf movies are a gauge of public interest, then people have been upset with motorcyclists since the 60s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_biker_films https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_biker_films
- kube-system 5y agoI don’t think Hollywood stereotypes of biker gangs was a predominant motivator for the Noise Control Act of ‘72. This is a regulation that generally regulates noise for all kinds of things, from appliances to airplanes. Their stated rationale is: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/4901 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/4901
- robonerd 5y agoI think Hollywood wasn't motivating anti-biker attitudes, just the opposite. Hollywood made these movies because the subject was of interest to the public. Motorcyclists were already notoriously antisocial by 1972, and that public sentiment probably informed the Noise Control Act of '72.
- faeriechangling 5y agoYou're going to need more than 30 motorcyclists at 80db before they equate to the sound of one car at 95db. The size of the gap seems pretty arbitrary. I've never seen a pack of dozens of motorcyclists, never mind seeing them "often", although I am aware that this is a thing. I imagine the lower DB limit is due to lawmakers dislike of noisy motorcyclists.
- bastawhiz 5y ago> often travel in packs of dozens which may continue passing your house for a minute or two, which feels like an hour You're just describing a busy street of cars here. A slow car followed by a few dozen cars who wish they were going faster is so common that almost nobody thinks about them. Individual motorcycles probably go unnoticed 9/10 times.
- blamazon 5y agoMotorcycles are more fuel/emission/volumetrically efficient and their ownership is thus generally incentivized by policy in traffic-stricken California. Not saying I agree or disagree that this should be applied to the sound thing, but this is the thinking.
- kevinventullo 5y agoIf that were true, shouldn’t the decibel maximum be higher for motorcycles?
- blamazon 5y agoDerp, you are correct. I read backwards.
- mdorazio 5y agoThink you have that backwards on emissions. Motorcycles pollute far more than cars. https://www.latimes.com/news/la-hy-throttle11-2008jun11-story.html https://www.latimes.com/news/la-hy-throttle11-2008jun11-stor...
- nickff 5y agoMotorcycles 'pollute' (particulates and other very harmful products) more than cars, but 'emit' less (carbon dioxide and other exhaust products).
- nradov 5y agoMany larger, more powerful motorcycles actually emit more carbon dioxide than modern hybrid sedans.
- pengaru 5y agoMy R1 had a cat, and that was way back in 2004. This definitely isn't some kind of absolute truth, CA-legal sportbikes have required cats and EFI for a while now. I'd have to check to see if there's a displacement threshold that excepts the small fry though.
- Swizec 5y agoSeems especially weird considering motorcycles are naturally louder because the exhaust is shorter, the muffler is smaller, the engine’s exposed. Maybe they went off of average engine size / power? Funny thing is a smaller engine needs to rev higher to make any power. Small bikes are ridiculously loud in cities because they need so much throttle to go anywhere. A stock 50cc moped is way louder than a stock 1000cc adventure bike.
- kube-system 5y agoIIRC the decibel rating that is used in the official testing is done at a specific RPM, it isn’t the maximum sound level.
- Swizec 5y agoOk but how would a street “camera” know your rating vs the noise you just made?
- kube-system 5y agoIt wouldn’t, I’m just commenting on the origin of those sound regulations.
- tzs 5y ago> but it seems like a decibel from one vehicle is as loud as a decibel from another, so I wonder why there's a double standard It could be due to differences in the frequency distribution in the spectrums of their emitted sounds. How sounds affect us depends on both the level of the sound and its spectrum. Also affected by the spectrum is how well a sound propagates. As a sound wave propagates it loses energy to the atmosphere, and the rate of that energy loss is frequency dependent. I think, but might have one or both of these reversed, is that we are more sensitive to midrange or higher frequencies than to lower frequencies, and that lower frequencies are attenuated slower. Given these differences I'm not surprised that there is a difference in the legal limits, although I don't know if these differences are the actual reasons for those different limits.
- IfOnlyYouKnew 5y agoThe requirements might be based on what’s achievable with reasonable efforts. Intuitively, I would think motorcycles are louder, but I may just be wrong (they are smaller and do less work, after all). This logic may seem strange but it isn’t unusual. Some jurisdictions have different fuel efficiency and pollution standards for diesel/gas vehicles or different sizes for example. In those cases, it’s the only way to improve without abolishing the less efficient classes outright. Alternatively, one could reason that motorcycles are used recreationally more often than cars, and that such activities have less legitimacy to annoy people.
- zardo 5y agoUnmodified motorcycles don't actually meet the 80 decibel limit in all situations, they just have to pass when ridden in the specific profile the test defines. Making this limit 80 decibels in all situations would require major changes from manufacturers.