Motorcycle emissions limits and fuel economy estimates

[Nomac]

Good Luck. Admins, thank you for such informative forum

[xcel]

Hi Nomac:

Welcome to CleanMPG and you are most certainly welcome!

Wayne

[jcp123]

Can't say I like the idea of emissions standards on bikes. As it is, I would think the fuel savings alone should be reason enough for the Feds to want to promote motorcycles, not choke them with more emissions standards like they did to cars in the '70's. It also takes away one of motorcycling's intrinsic appeals: simplicity. Lastly, the cats (at least in Harleys, which is what I observe working at a Harley dealer) get bloody hot, and a lot of people will swap that stock exhaust to get rid of the heat. Some folks who otherwise wouldn't even bother investing $700 in a new exhaust will do so, just to get rid of the heat emitted by the cat. It therefore becomes something of a moot point to install a cat on a motorcycle when most people will remove them just to make it comfortable to ride. That's probably a good $200 wasted on the built-in price of the catalyst when the motorcycle was new, and another $700 down the drain for an exhaust for someone who wouldn't bother but for the cat's heat. Does forcing the first $200 to be spent, and beckoning the next $700 to be spent sound like cause to get one's feathers ruffled? It does to me - think about that happening to you in any context you wish.

Having said that, I do think motorcycle fuel economy needs to be more uniformly measured and posted at the dealer much like cars. Getting information on motorcycle fuel economy is like pulling teeth compared to cars.

[alvaro84]

I don't understand what's complicated in a catalytic converter. It's just there, you don't even have to touch it It doesn't have to be that bad, there are many bikes where you won't even notice the cat.

But I totally agree that their FE should be uniformly measured and posted.

[jcp123]

The catalytic converter is one thing. Requiring them to meet, for instance, automobile emissions standards is quite another. We'll be seeing the myriad of emissions systems such as EGR that most if not all cars already carry. You'll just have more stuff to maintain and sift through to do other work on the bike along with a higher initial purchase price.

Obviously, emissions are not a priority for me. But as motorcycles are more of a "lifestyle" purchase here in the United States, it would kill a whole industry (and what desperately-needed jobs it offers), IMHO, to take away motorcycling's simplicity for the sake of emissions controls. Think about all the consequences first before saying you wish to have better emissions on motorcycles.

[xcel]

Hi Jcp123:

As of now, there will be no real increases in the emissions standard other than those that have already been placed on the books.

That said, CAT's do not need to be hot as the WR and KLX or the bigger bore 800 and 1200 GS' have them yet their is no undo heat generated thanks to the standoffs and good design. We need bikes to have FI and CAT's so as to keep them off the radar. Nationwide, bikes make up just 0.4% of the VMT's yet used to output as much as 5% of all NOx and PM emissions of the light duty truck, cars and motorcycle population. This is changing quickly thanks to CAT's on the small through big bikes, not just the premium ones.

Regarding FE standards, they are in place. All bike manufacturers have to report their bikes emissions on the FTP to the EPA and in doing so; have measured the FE via CO2 indirectly just as the auto manufacturers have done. They (Yamaha, Kawasaki and Suzuki) are posting the CAFE' city numbers that all cars are reporting under CAFE. While that makes the FE un-realistic for most, it is a comparison from brand to brand. Now if only Honda would release its numbers for all its bikes like the rest instead of its micro-scooters with the really big numbers.

Finally, bike FE is not all that great. I have heard the 1.8L Goldwings and 990 KTM Adventures are good for just 35 mpg in the real world which makes them FSP’s in my book. A Prius or HCH-II will bust the average rider’s FE on any bike (other than the scooters) out on the highway. Allowing a bike to forgo emissions testing because they get 50 mpg on the 08 EPA city test (the WR, KLX and CRF would be rated at ~ that level) means Prius' and HI-I's, -II's, HCH-I's and -II's should not have to meet specs either. That is not going to happen.

Good Luck

Wayne

[jcp123]

FI is no perfect solution either; most folks I talk to with Harley Sportsters reported better FE with a carb than with EFI, and the carbs only need regular unleaded to EFI's required 91-or-better octane. Riders on Big Twin Harleys don't seem to notice a difference in mileage one way or the other; shouldn't an effective EFI get better mileage than the "lowly" carburetor? There's also the increased maintenance cost of EFI's myriad of electronic componentry. Now, that's just Harleys and I'm sure that doesn't apply across the board. But as you know I'm a carb fan, so EFI's a hard pill to swallow

As far as the EPA and the EIA fuel economy numbers go, aren't bikes measured on a different test routine than cars? From the numbers I have found, the only thing more wildly inaccurate than cars' EPA numbers are those for bikes. Mine is rated 42/57, and while I have one time achieved 57mpg, it should probably be closer to 40/53 from what I've experienced. The bikes you cite are big honking bikes; most of the ones I see day to day are good for 40-45mpg, 50-55 on the highway, which is precisely what my 1200cc scooter is getting (when I'm not riding a 1,7 mile commute and dumping fuel into the motor on open loop the whole way!).

I suppose other manufacturers have better cat designs, again I will stress that my experience comes working at a Harley dealer where I hear complaints about Harley cats at least once a day. YMMV with other makes

Lastly, you say that there is nothing slated to be on the books for motorcycle emissions. While this is strictly speaking true, we are already seeing cats on motorcycles and even evaporative emissions control systems in California. Beware the slippery slope.

[xcel]

Hi JCP:

The only way to meet emissions is through EFI. A carburetor is simply to sloppy a control for today’s specs. Maintenance of a bikes FI system "should" be as bulletproof as your car. Meaning you never touch it. A carburetor is always going to be played with if you do any elevation changes over ~ 4,000'. FE wise, a FI system will trounce a carb as well. The properly metered fuel is not wasting nearly as much as a blow by of raw and imprecisely measured fuel past the throttle plate with a carb.

Same city test. Car's have the raw CAFE specs that you have to look up for both city and highway. I post them every year in the files section if you want to see the actual. The 10 Prius is rated at 70 mpg as just one example of CAFÉ’ “standards” vs. what appears on the Monroney sticker (51 city/48 highway/50 mpg combined). The FE reported on the Monroey is an amalgamation of the 5-cycle tests from the city and highway tests or the actual from the 5-cycle tests with the offsets applied. The Bikes only use the city test with no offsets applied just as was shown on the Monroney stickers prior to 1984 for cars and light duty trucks.

Regarding evap controls, they should be on all bikes. For example, do you know a 1974 anything (name any car or truck) sitting on the side of the road not running has more emission then your 2010 anything while moving down the road? The CA emissions on the WR is simply a steel tank with a sealing cap, a charcoal canister for venting the tank and a sealed crankcase. There is nothing slippery about it other than the loss of .1 gallons of fuel tank capacity in the case of the WR.

This is not a freedom issue but one of the air we breathe. Emissions controls are a matter of fact today and if one manufacturer cannot step up and match the specs that are given to it 5 + years in advance, it will be out of business.

Good Luck

Wayne

[southerncannuck]

I've had quite a few bikes (12) over the years, and I would prefer to never have another carburated one again. I know how to work on them, but the problem is that you have to work on them. That's how I know how to work on them. I think that most Harley guy modify their bikes, and this is easier with a carb and no catalytic converter. If you leave it alone they will not give you any trouble. While I'm on the subject of old versus new, I don't want anymore chains either. I guess that I'm getting old.

PS, since putting on a windscreen on the scooter, the MPGs are down.

[jcp123]

I do see more than a few issues in the service shop where I work with EFI-related components. Particularly, fuel pumps, throttle bodies, and that god-awful fly-by-wire throttle seem to be particularly troublesome, something carb'd bikes don't have. Once in a while we see problems with throttle position sensors and crankshaft position sensors as well (though the latter are used in conjunction with carb'd electronic ignition bikes as well). To their cradit, O2 sensors, constantly placed in one of the hottest spots in the exhaust stream seem to hold up exceptionally well, as do the ECM's, and the engine temperature sensors seem to exhibit at least average-to-above-average reliability.

Carbureted bikes don't have these problems, since these components don't exist. Any book on failure rate analysis will tell you that EFI's more complicated architecture plus is high individual component cost almost has to be a liability. Even extremely low failure rates compound very quickly with the more parts you have in any given system. Think about a $450 gravity-fed carburetor vs. ~$200 fuel pump, $60 injectors, $50 TPS, $500 throttle body, $100 IAC valve, $400 ECM, all with their own individually compounding failure rates.

Except for (car) Holleys and a few of the more exotic carbs (Solex, etc.), carbs are more set-it-and-forget-it than you might think. Though I don't have a carbureted bike right now, I can say in the Mustang all it takes is about 90 seconds twice a year to swap out my metering rods for summer vs. winter, and I never have to worry about its tune again. That really isn't so much work, is it?

MPGwise, it is more-or-less taken as a fact, as I stated earlier, that carbureted (pre-2007) Harley Sportsters got marginally better FE than those with standard EFI, and that Big Twin models saw no improvement (though no decline). This is admittedly anecdotal, but comes from a lot of riders so there may be some truth in numbers. I can't know whether this is from inferior EFI design or what, but that fact remains. That aside, a well-tuned carburetor should more or less equal the FE of an EFI'd vehicle of the same specs (make, model, weight, gearing, motor size and specs, etc.). And that fact remains that the average bike will still get better FE than the average car, which I say once again should be something we should be lauding for our own national security and prosperity rather than trying to saddle with yet more regulation that's strangled so much of our economy already. People aren't going to care much about the environment until they can pay their bills.

As for emissions, I see you feel strongly about it. I simply...don't. I save fuel to save money