Cycle News - Archive Issues - 1980's

•.• 1 .,.1,."t'Il't ....'.,'.~ft . \~.".--t .. f~."'...... ,, I 4Att~JItI1.~"'Jlt" Lucerne Valley - Red Mountain - Plaster City - Sacramento Report A' ,,4.f • • • ~ •.•• 4,"-t.f""'j, s~~.:c..i~t:"': S ;.~R~d . .. Catalytic converters not required yet By Bob Ham The question under debate was whether purchasers of 1984 model motorcycles in California were going to have to have a 12 catalytic converter on their new bike. The concern of most riders was whether we will be required to spend an extra $200 to $500 to purchase a 280cc or larger .road bike, and have the added worry about riding around with a 700 degree device within inches of the rider's or pa,ssenger's body. The Air Resources Board announced the meeting in this precise but bureaucratic manner; "Public hearing to consider motorcycle manufacturers' petitions requesting amendments to Title 13, California Administrative Code, Section 1958, and related test procedures, regardinR the 1.0 gram per kilometer hydrocarbon exhaust emissions for class III motorcycles for 1984 and subsequent years." What all of that gobledegook means is that C.A.R.B. met in Sacramento on Thursday, Oct. 28, to decide whether or not to require the motorcycle manufacturers to meet a standard for emissions of hydrocarbons of 1 gram per kilometer beginning in the 1984 model year. The current standard is 2.5 grams pet kilometer, although the ipdustry testified that on the average, today's bikes are already down to about 1.5 grams. The hearing began with a fairly· detailed and technical report by the staff of C.A.R.B., describing why they felt that it would be OK to adopt the new standard. The industry then presented their side of the story. Essentially, the industry is unable to meet t~is lower standard without equipplOg many of the new road bikes with expensive and probably unreliable catalytic converters. Because the state elections were less than a week away, and the staff of C.A-.R.B. was well aware that both candidates for Governor have been talking about slowing down antibusiness regulatory agencies, there seemed to be a tremendous sense of urgency on the part of staff to have a decision made right now. Fortunately, several of the Board members seemed impressed by the industry arguments on cost effectiveness; technical effectiveness; the safety and compliance aspects; and the potential financial . impact on the dealers. These Board m~mbers appeared to be impressed with the progress that t~e industry has been making in "cleaning up" the emissions on these larger bikes, and decided to defer making a decision right away. The staff and the industry will try to come up with a compromise at the next meeting of the Board on Dec. I of this year. There is reason to be hopeful that the industry will be able to propose further improvements to the emissions control systems of the larger street bikes, and come up with a timetable for further emissions improvements which will be acceptable . to the Board. The Motorcycle Industry Council and the individual manufacturers came well equipped to argue the case for a further postponement of the tough new standards. After Alan Isley of the MIC presented a summation of the industry arguments, it was obvious that several of the Board members were looking for alternatives to requiring the catalytic technology at this time. The staff sensed that Isley had begun swaying the board and became quite defensive of their position. The industry, on the other hand p~es~nted a posture of being quit~ wIlhng to work on other solutions to solving the emissions problem. This time reason seems to have won out we will certainly know more after th~ Dec. 1 decision is made, but in the meantime there is good reason to be optimistic. In summary, the arguments presented by the staff of C.A.R.B. were: 1. The motorcycle industry has had nine years to find a way to meet the 1.0 gram per kilometer standard, so therefore it should now be imposed .. .Industry's response is that they have made substantial progress in those nine years. One cannot set an arbitrary number of years and establish it as an absolute timetable under which technological advances must be made. . 2. The catalyst technology is feasib~e and cost effective...The industry disputes both the feasibility of conventional catalytic converters because t~ey may have to be replaced. several umes during the life of a motorcycle, they are not really cost effective. 3. The technology is readily available...again, the industry disputes that the automobile technology is readily transferabkbecause of the problems presented by the added vibrations on motorcycles. 4. The catalytic converters can easily be blended into the styling of most motorcycle designs...The industry has some problems even from a styling point of view. Because of the exceptionally high temperature of the devices, extra caution must be taken to prevent rider or passenger exposure to the catalytic converter. The added size of the exhaust device and the need to provide heat shielding present additional design problems, not to mention the fact that chrome plating turns blue when it gets very hot, which leaves the manufacturers with some fairly knotty design problems to work on. 5. ~he hydrocarbon impact on the enVIronment which is attributable to class III motorcycles can be reduced by one-half...This is a relatively small benefit when one considers that we are talking about reducing total hydrocarbon emissions from two tenths of one percent to one tenth of one percent. In short road bikes are a very minute aspect of the problem to begin with. 6. The problem of users tampering with the devices is not a real problem, and this can be enforced...An i~dustry survey reveals that a fairly hIgh percent of users might be tempted to remove the devices. Enforcement would be nonexistent exc~pt in the every other year insPectIon program which will begin in many counties next year. The High~ay Patrol has had to forego enforc109 spe~ laws on many secondary state hIghways because of tight bu~gets; it is .unlikely that they are golOg to begm a massive program to nab riders who have tampered with their emission controls. 7..Acooperativeeducation program with the ARB and the industry could dissolve the myth that catalytic converters are bad...good luck! Dan Ashcraft was hot at the 100's hare and hound. (File photo.) Ashcraft hot at 100's Hare & Hound By Shirley Upp LUCERNE, CA, OCT. 24 Husky rider Dan Ashcraft stayed hot in Lucerne Valley today as he took the overall win in the 15th annual 100's Motorcycle Club Hare and Hound. The desert has cooled off and is once again perfect for desert racing. Not so with Dan Ashcraft; he just seems to be staying hot - in perfect racing form. Dan Smith, another Husky rider, gave Ashcraft some trouble the last 15 miles before the checker.ed, these two making up the dicing duel of the year. In th~ first canyon about four miles past the bomb, it was Shamrock Open Amateur ace Tom Willis in the lead. Honda's super rider Lee Scheffers came second with Ashcraft running third at this point. The first 250cc rider to pass by was Ed Pierce J r. in fourth overall, followed by the "animal" Chris Crandall. Howard McCasland (250) was second in class and sixth overall, but not for long. Tom Kelly came next at seventh. Hot in the C bike class was Bill Mattox; leading the Amateur class was 250cc rider Andy Mathews and as usual, it was Gary Charters in front . in the Vet class. Out past the bomb in the Novice/ Beginner race it was Troy Swafford showing some great style. Running second and on the whip was Scott Stearns. In the Novice Vet class, C. Bordenave had the lead, but speedster Tim Gilligan was on the throttle and moving up through the dust; he soon took over the lead in class. Sharon Dietz was in the lead in the Women's Novice class. After the first loop of approximately 41 miles, Ashcraft had moved up to take the lead. Scheffers was not far behind in second and Smith had moved up to third. Smith had been leading at the bomb until a plug wire came loose and he had to stop to make repairs. At fourth overall, McCasland was now first 250. Bill Saltzman had taken over the first Open Vet spot and Ron Suber was doing a fine job in the Open Senior class by holding the lead. Jim Bringhurst had a great start today and was leading the 250cc Vet class, while Charlie Goodban, so far, had the Senior 250cc class tied up. Women's Amateur Denise Engstrom was doing some super riding and was holding the lead over Women's Expert Lori Farmer. After 71 miles, it was Ashcraft in for the overall win. Ashcraft said that when Smith caught him they had the best dicing match of the year. Ashcraft wanted to thank Husqvarna, Husky Products, Pro-Circuit, Champion Spark Plugs, Scott USA and Bel-Ray for their help. After his difficulties on the bomb run Smith turned in a super ride, also thanking his sponsors: Kern Sport Cycle, Malcolm Smith Products and Maxima Lubri~ants. Lee Scheffers said he just physIcally ran out of gas on the last loop, but otherwise had a good ride to third overall. At fourth overall was McCasland, taking first in the 250cc class for sponsors: Honda, Sinisalo, Kal-Gard and Duralube. Tom Kelly took fifth with Saltzman in for sixth and first Open Vet. Next came Mattox, who took the first C bike honors and, doing some fine riding for first 250cc Amateur, was Dale Conner. First Novice overall was Scott Stearns. Sharon Dietz crashed and Karen Young took first in the Women Novice class. Taking first overall Beginner was Don Aria, wearing the jersey of the Sage Raiders, a new club that is making its desert debut. Tim Champness took first 250cc Beginner for the Stump Jumpers. Unofficial Results OPEN EX: 1. D. Ashcraft; 2. D. Smith; 3. L. Scheffers. . OPEN AM: 1. D. Davidson; 2. J. Rapp; 3. D. Klohr. OPEN NOV: 1. #316; 2. G. Palenske; 3. Jerald Jaszarowski. . OPEN BEG: 1. D. Aria; 2. M. Huft; 3. J. Betker. 250 EX: 1. H. McCasland; 2. S. Zollinger; 3. T. Hunnicutt. 250 AM: 1. Dale Conner; 2. B. Stathan; 3. R. Johnson. 250 NOV: 1. S. Stearns; 2. #183x; 3. #26Ox. 250 8EG: 1. T. Champness; 2. D. Meadows. 0-200 EX: 1. B. Mattox; 2. D. Sunners; 3. T. Elias. 0-200 AM: 1. E. Hallgath; 2. R. Waters; 3: M. Stoner. 0-200 NOV: 1. B. Farrow; 2. H. Giese; 3. B. Smith. OP~N VET EX: 1. B. Saltzman; 2. G. Charters; 3. D. EllIS. OPEN VET AM: 1. R. Nelson; 2. R. Burski; 3. Joe Jaszarowski. . OPEN VET NOV: 1. T. Gilligan; 2. C. Bordenave; 3. S. Martin. OPEN VET BEG: 1. #V196; 2. J. Correll; 3. D. Huddleston. 250 VET EX: 1. J. Bringhurst; 2. L Gorden· 3. B. Smith. • 250 VET AM: 1. D. De Simone; 2. J. Sheehy; 3. R. Paproski. 250 VET NOV: 1. L. Stiffler; 2. #V68x; 3. M. Villanueva. 250 VET BEG: 1. #V92x; 2. B. Austin. SR OPEN EX: 1. R. Surber; 2. C. Morris; 3. C. Roistra. SR OPEN AM: 1. #0181; 2. R. Morris; 3. V. French. SR OPEN NOV: 1. D. Wilcox; 2. C. Sims; 3. M. Manning. SR OPEN BEG: 1. N. Etherton; 2. D. Merritt. 250 SR EX: 1. C. Goodban; 2. W. Goodman; 3. D. Postmao . 250 SR AM: 1. S. Varner; 2. R. Watson; 3. G. Tucker. SR C EX: 1. I. Sinclair; 2. W. Eveland; 3. T. Webb. SR CAM: 1. M. Teney; 2. G. Purser· 3 J Overholt. • . . SR C BEG: 1. C. Henderson. WOMEN EX: 1. Lori Farmer; 2. Jolene Payne· 3, Cindy McCown. . • WOMEN AM: 1. Denise Engstrom; 2. Jackie Barsow. WOMEN NOV: 1. Karen Young; 2. Sharon Dietz.

• Cover