|
California's new exhaust laws (merged threads)
Not sure if the ISF community has heard about it yet but starting January of this year, state of California is giving a mandatory $1,000 fine in which you probably have to go to court and most likely visit the state reff for having a louder/modified exhaust. WTF is CA turning into? This seriously boils my head. I have paid every freakin fee this state has to offer and now this new law in effect? SMH...
Here is a video: https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.clu...c5dc21b56b.jpg https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.clu...4d99242348.jpg |
I'm really interested to see how hard this gets in forced. California is arguably the largest aftermarket region in the US. SO MANY people put exhaust on their cars, trucks and motorcycles... even those that aren't really "car guys/girls". I can't imagine police pulling people over just for a loud exhaust....unless it is OBNOXIOUSLY LOUD or you are already doing something stupid.
|
It will only get worse over time. I saw this in my crystal ball and left in 2007 for good after 24 years in California.
|
Please stop spreading FUD. It's $207 for the fine, I would know since I got slapped with this January 1. Either way there is burden of proof on the state (officers) to validate your car being "too loud". I'm going to fight my ticket as there was no decibel reading let alone a visual inspection from the officer. I can't correct something if the ticket is marked non correctable...
|
Where is everybody getting this $1000 rumor, nowhere in the law does it say the fine is that much. I saw that one Instagram video everybody is sharing but that seems like the cop is just using scare tactics and gave her a state ref just to be an a******. |
Originally Posted by JohnMorgan
(Post 10403294)
Please stop spreading FUD. It's $207 for the fine, I would know since I got slapped with this January 1. Either way there is burden of proof on the state (officers) to validate your car being "too loud". I'm going to fight my ticket as there was no decibel reading let alone a visual inspection from the officer. I can't correct something if the ticket is marked non correctable...
|
Doing trial by written declaration. I wouldn't have so much of an issue if he had some sort of evidence but, unless there is some strict training for officers ears to be able to detect a certain decibel level that is out of spec I'm going to fight this. The subjectivity at the officers discretion of what is "too loud" and what isn't is a big problem for me (and everyone really) because it has more implications than just exhaust. This law gives officers carte blanc to write tickets at will and be judge and jury on the spot without any supporting evidence.
Originally Posted by 2010ISF
(Post 10403328)
if you do fight it, keep us all updated with what happens. The law says you can modify your exhaust as long as it’s not meant to amplify the sound, so you cant just get a ticket solely because your exhaust is modified. I feel like you can easily get away with the “its not a V6 f sport” argument and say the cop had no idea what kind of car he was pulling over. |
I remember the old law limit was 95db (which is pretty loud). Not sure how they will be enforcing something so subjective. |
California tree huggiing lobbyist have made Cali one of birth places of car modding into anti car zone. With more and more restrictive laws on book including your crappy 91 octane gas. If I owned any sort of car enthusiasts company it would be time to move to Texas Nevada or Utah. It will become land of Tesla's, Priuss, and SUV.
|
Originally Posted by JohnMorgan
(Post 10403334)
Doing trial by written declaration. I wouldn't have so much of an issue if he had some sort of evidence but, unless there is some strict training for officers ears to be able to detect a certain decibel level that is out of spec I'm going to fight this. The subjectivity at the officers discretion of what is "too loud" and what isn't is a big problem for me (and everyone really) because it has more implications than just exhaust. This law gives officers carte blanc to write tickets at will and be judge and jury on the spot without any supporting evidence.
Let us know John :) I have the X Force Varex rn, guess valved are closed atm. |
Just added a video...
|
Originally Posted by JohnMorgan
(Post 10403334)
Doing trial by written declaration. I wouldn't have so much of an issue if he had some sort of evidence but, unless there is some strict training for officers ears to be able to detect a certain decibel level that is out of spec I'm going to fight this. The subjectivity at the officers discretion of what is "too loud" and what isn't is a big problem for me (and everyone really) because it has more implications than just exhaust. This law gives officers carte blanc to write tickets at will and be judge and jury on the spot without any supporting evidence.
|
California is only going to get worse with their draconian laws against cars and the ridiculous emissions standards that they have set forth. I think Lance hit it on the head when he saw this coming and he moved out of the state as have millions of others over the past decade or so. Now more people move out of Cali as opposed to moving to the golden state.
|
Idk which state is worse for car guys, CA or VA?
|
Originally Posted by idoke1
(Post 10403182)
Not sure if the ISF community has heard about it yet but starting January of this year, state of California is giving a mandatory $1,000 fine in which you probably have to go to court and most likely visit the state reff for having a louder/modified exhaust.
Like Lance, I left Kalifornia a long time ago. Kalifornia isn't just now turning into anything, it's been this way for decades. |
Never lived in Cali but being in the tech field there's a lot of companies out there to work for but the Cali emissions bs is just one part of the reasons I'll prob never move there. I like my emissions free county registered vehicles out here in CO too much.
|
I've had limo tint and no front plate for over 15 years and have never gotten a ticket in Southern California. Its also 68 and sunny today so I hope everybody moves out of this state.
|
^^^^Back in '95, when I lived in Santa Barbara, I got a ticket for no front plate on my then '93 SC300 5MT. I was parked in underground parking at a mall with my front facing the wall. I was pretty pissed:mad:
Lou |
California Exhaust Law - Say goodbye to brap brap brap
Surprised there hasnt been a thread on this yet.
https://bar.ca.gov/Consumer/Referee_...ification.html Discuss! |
It could be because that's what it's always been:
95db. I got a ticket back in like 2010 for this. The referee station recorded that my Greddy came in at low 94. Judge signed off that I was good to go and that was that. |
^^ That cop must had been one angry douche to do that.
|
I feel like the only thing that would cause some real undue attention are the straight pipe and some of the full header/cat-back folks. Other than the Apex'i exhaust, I don't think any of them are really obnoxiously loud.
BMW M cars, RC/GS-F, and most Porsches are all louder than my 350 with a cat back. I'm sure there will be plenty of factory exhausts that will get tickets too though. |
I have a standing offer for anyone in Cali selling their INVIDIA Q300 60mm Midpipe for $200 shipped.
|
Yup the law hasn't changed, only how it is enforced and cited. People are making a big deal out of the supposed "mandatory" fine and the cops stating that it's "not a fix it ticket anymore" but it's essentially still how it's always been. Once you get the ticket, you will need to prove you are legal by going to the ref. If you're not legal, then you pay a [bigger] fine now. It's just being strongly enforced, for now, because of all the idiots and their street takeovers/side shows.
|
Exhaust laws to be aware of
Many of these existed prior in the CVCC though the noise will be handled differently following passage of AB1824. These will now come with fines along with the fix-it for an offending exhaust system.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...r=5.&article=2 |
what is AB1824, I find no information on this bill except one with that number dating back to 2016 in relating to service animals.
|
Sorry to hear this kind of garbage. Funny thing, laws were created to protect citizens. A lot has changed over time. Weather sucks in the salt belt, but they don’t monitor cars at all. If you have money to pay the fee, you can plate anything. No silly rules. |
I'm not trying to get political here but it's funny because the President has been actively trying to get rid of CARB and rollback California's ridiculous emissions standards and is wanting to get them to conform to federal standards which means you can do whatever you want to your car. California has so much power that manufacturers are forced to abide by their standards for new vehicles which increases the cost of new vehicles by several thousand dollars. There's a lot of interesting articles online everybody should look at. I also saw somewhere that after 2020 whatever emissions come out of your exhaust will have such a minuscule effect on climate change that it does more harm than good to have these strict emissions standards. So I wonder what all the car enthusiasts would say if he actually gains some ground on this fight and the media gives it some attention.
|
Originally Posted by flowrider
(Post 10403646)
^^^^Back in '95, when I lived in Santa Barbara, I got a ticket for no front plate on my then '93 SC300 5MT. I was parked in underground parking at a mall with my front facing the wall. I was pretty pissed:mad:
Lou I feel like most v8 mustangs, camaros, chargers, and v8 trucks are 5x as loud as our ISF's. I have a feeling a lot of the FRS/BRZ community will feel the most from this new law since almost all of them I see on the road have modded shiny/loud exhausts. |
I wonder how they’ll manage motorcycles? Every Harley in CA would be affected |
Every F-Type R owner will get slapped with a ticket too lol.
|
Originally Posted by Jz39
(Post 10404126)
I wonder how they’ll manage motorcycles? Every Harley in CA would be affected |
here is the Bill as written, no mention of the fine amount in the bill anywhere, it appears to me the decision is at the officers discretion, he can make it a correctable equipment violation or not, which has always been the case, I got referee'd in 2005 for loud exhaust, (long tubes, no cats, hi-flow off road mufflers) written as a non-correctable citation.
I think that video is just a LEO that has no clue and is misinterpreting the law to suit his power trip complex. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...01720180AB1824SEC. 4. Section 40610 of the Vehicle Code is amended to read: 40610. (a) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), if, after an arrest, accident investigation, or other law enforcement action, it appears that a violation has occurred involving a registration, license, all-terrain vehicle safety certificate, or mechanical requirement of this code, and none of the disqualifying conditions set forth in subdivision (b) exist and the investigating officer decides to take enforcement action, the officer shall prepare, in triplicate, and the violator shall sign, a written notice containing the violator’s promise to correct the alleged violation and to deliver proof of correction of the violation to the issuing agency. (2) If any person is arrested for a violation of Section 4454, and none of the disqualifying conditions set forth in subdivision (b) exist, the arresting officer shall prepare, in triplicate, and the violator shall sign, a written notice containing the violator’s promise to correct the alleged violation and to deliver proof of correction of the violation to the issuing agency. In lieu of issuing a notice to correct violation pursuant to this section, the officer may issue a notice to appear, as specified in Section 40522. (b) Pursuant to subdivision (a), a notice to correct violation shall be issued as provided in this section or a notice to appear shall be issued as provided in Section 40522, unless the officer finds any of the following: (1) Evidence of fraud or persistent neglect. (2) The violation presents an immediate safety hazard. (3) The violator does not agree to, or cannot, promptly correct the violation. (4) The violation cited is of subdivision (a) of Section 27150 or of subdivision (a) of Section 27151. (c) If any of the conditions set forth in subdivision (b) exist, the procedures specified in this section or Section 40522 are inapplicable, and the officer may take other appropriate enforcement action. (d) Except as otherwise provided in subdivision (a), the notice to correct violation shall be on a form approved by the Judicial Council and, in addition to the owner’s or operator’s address and identifying information, shall contain an estimate of the reasonable time required for correction and proof of correction of the particular defect, not to exceed 30 days, or 90 days for the all-terrain vehicle safety certificate. The one change I do see is in section B of VC 27150 now includes the verbiage: https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/vehicle...ect-27150.html "no muffler or exhaust system shall be equipped with a cutout, bypass, or similar device." which appears to have been added in 2016, because my 2015 VC book doesn't have that line, but the 2016 version does. |
AB1824 2018
Here in (4): https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...01720180AB1824 (4) Existing law provides that whenever any person is arrested for certain offenses, including, among other things, an infraction involving vehicle equipment, the arresting officer is required to permit the arrested person to execute a notice, prepared by the officer in triplicate, containing a promise to correct the violation and to deliver proof of correction to the issuing agency, unless the arresting officer finds that a disqualifying condition exists.Existing law requires every motor vehicle subject to registration to be equipped with an adequate muffler in constant operation and properly maintained to prevent any excessive or unusual noise and prohibits a muffler or exhaust system from being equipped with a cutout, bypass, or similar device. Existing law further prohibits the modification of an exhaust system of a motor vehicle in a manner that will amplify or increase the noise emitted by the motor of the vehicle so that the vehicle exceeds existing noise limits.This bill would include, among those conditions that are disqualifying, a violation of the above-described requirements related to mufflers and exhaust systems.
CHP PDF here: https://www.chp.ca.gov/PressReleases/Pages/18-46_CHP_New_laws_2019.pdf [QUOTE] Certain vehicle exhaust violations no longer correctable (AB 1824, Committee on Budget): A fine will become mandatory, not correctable, when loud motor vehicles and motor cycles are cited. Previously, a driver or motorcyclist who was cited for modified or excessively loud exhaust or muffler systems could correct the violation to avoid a fine. |
Originally Posted by mjeds
(Post 10404147)
here is the Bill as written, no mention of the fine amount in the bill anywhere, it appears to me the decision is at the officers discretion, he can make it a correctable equipment violation or not, which has always been the case, I got referee'd in 2005 for loud exhaust, (long tubes, no cats, hi-flow off road mufflers) written as a non-correctable citation.
I think that video is just a LEO that has no clue and is misinterpreting the law to suit his power trip complex. |
Originally Posted by 2010ISF
(Post 10404113)
I'm not trying to get political here but it's funny because the President has been actively trying to get rid of CARB and rollback California's ridiculous emissions standards and is wanting to get them to conform to federal standards which means you can do whatever you want to your car. California has so much power that manufacturers are forced to abide by their standards for new vehicles which increases the cost of new vehicles by several thousand dollars. There's a lot of interesting articles online everybody should look at. I also saw somewhere that after 2020 whatever emissions come out of your exhaust will have such a minuscule effect on climate change that it does more harm than good to have these strict emissions standards. So I wonder what all the car enthusiasts would say if he actually gains some ground on this fight and the media gives it some attention.
Car mfgs are on board with cali, last i heard, heck they even mentioned the previous mpg targets that are on the chopping block were already achievable. noise ordinance are totally a different animal. |
There's a paucity of reliable information about anthropogenic global climate change. Those claiming a lock on the truth are as unreliable as the folks telling us saturated fats cause heart disease when the truth is, sugar kills. MPG targets are always achievable, but at what cost? Almost as short sighted as saying electrics are the salvation when powering them uses fossil fuels; primarily natural gas these days.
|
Sooo... what if we have performance exhausts from factory?
Like what taktiks mentioned, all the M cars, F cars, super cars will come LOUDer than usual from factory.. Guess its going to the junkyard?:ban: |
Originally Posted by coolsaber
(Post 10404305)
Ill bite, published, peer reviewed scientific journal article source?
Car mfgs are on board with cali, last i heard, heck they even mentioned the previous mpg targets that are on the chopping block were already achievable. noise ordinance are totally a different animal. https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.do...-26_deis_0.pdf |
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:02 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands