A-RustyDemon

~SPONSOR~
Dec 9, 2002
152
0
Ok everyone Two Stokes will not be history like the Dinosaurs. Read this!! The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is adopting strict emissions standards that could mean the end of two-stroke trail bikes and All-Terrain Vehicles (ATVs) by 2006, according to the AMA.

In announcing the new emissions standards in September, the EPA said the rules "encourage manufacturers of these vehicles to switch from two-stroke engines to cleaner four-stroke engines, beginning in 2006" for trail machines.

The federal agency is exempting racing machines from the strict emissions standards, so motocrossers won't be affected, and left the door open for the production of a new breed of two-stroke engines by creating a special, less-stringent emissions standard for "certified competition machines" that could be used for competition and trail riding.

The EPA also scrapped an earlier plan to make ATVs meet even stricter emissions standards in 2009.

These are the first federal emissions standards created for off-highway motorcycles and ATVs. The EPA has set requirements only slightly less stringent than those in place in California, which have severely restricted two-stroke off-highway machine use there.

National requirements for road motorcycles have been in place for more than 20 years and are in the process of being replaced with stricter standards.

Under the new EPA rules, new trail bikes and ATVs would be subject to strict emissions requirements that would be partially phased-in in 2006. Full compliance would be required by the manufacturers in 2007.

The requirements wouldn't affect machines built through 2005, but would apply to machines built for the 2006 model year and thereafter. The EPA said it expects that manufacturers will meet these new standards for trail machines by using four-stroke engines.

When the EPA was putting together the new rules, the AMA urged the agency to avoid regulations that would eliminate two-stroke machines, which are favored by many off-highway riders for their light weight and power characteristics. Instead, the AMA told the agency to consider creating separate emissions standards for four-stroke and two-stroke motorcycles and ATVs.

While the EPA rejected the idea of separate standards for four-strokes and two-strokes, it did create a new classification called the "certified competition machine," which could be used for competition or trail riding. The emissions standards for a certified competition machine aren't as strict as those for a trail bike or non-competition ATV. Theoretically, this could become the standard for two-stroke trail motorcycles and ATVs.

The AMA also asked the EPA to set specific emissions goals that must be met by off-highway motorcycle and ATV manufacturers rather than mandating what equipment must be on the bikes, such as catalytic converters. The EPA agreed.

The AMA also told the EPA to reconsider an idea to restrict the sale of "competition-only" machines to professionals. The AMA noted that most off-highway motorcycle and ATV racing in the United States involves amateurs. The EPA agreed in its final rules, saying it would be "inappropriate" to limit competition machines to professional racers.

Finally, the AMA and others involved in motorcycling presented data to show that the EPA grossly overestimated the annual use of off-highway motorcycles and ATVs and, as a result, overestimated the amount of pollution they cause. The EPA agreed, and that's at least part of the reason the agency decided at this time not to require ATVs to meet even stricter emissions requirements beginning in 2009.
 

marcusgunby

LIFETIME SPONSOR
Jan 9, 2000
6,450
2
Whilst i think in general this news is good im not sure japan will alter its plans at this stage-i think they have planned for a ban in 2006 and will carry on with the path they are going down-ie no 2 strokes to have any heavy R and D time/money.
 
Last edited:

James

Lifetime Sponsor
LIFETIME SPONSOR
Dec 26, 2001
1,839
0
I just hope they don't try and slide in the 'license' to buy these 'certified' competition machines.
 

bigred455

"LET'S JUST RIDE"
LIFETIME SPONSOR
Sep 12, 2000
782
0
So basically we have to ride are evil bikes on a closed circuit,like we have too now.
 

Kawierider

Member
Jun 7, 2001
281
0
Hmmm, sounds like to me kawasaki better make the kdx more competition like....kx frame anyone ?
KTM seems pretty well set. does anyone know what calssifies a bike as "competition certified"yet ?
 

jmics19067

LIFETIME SPONSOR
Jan 22, 2002
2,097
0
legal paperwork is probably all the classification differences. Just slap a sticker on the rear fender saying "closed course competition only".

doubt it would help any for a green sticker or legal use in public lands. Unless they build a preproduction unit that passes the exhaust sniff test <or however they check for emmision legality for an offroad vehicle>
 

Nevada Sixx

Member
Jan 14, 2000
1,033
0
its crazy how epa wants to ban dirt bikes, but in mississippi, you can burn tires and plastic in your front yard or have a car that's a smog monster,,and noone says a word.
 

Lissa

"Am I lost again?"
Apr 28, 2002
562
0
It humors me how the EPA can laxen the emmission restrictions on factories and industry this year, but create emmission restriction for OHV's. I've written my letters voicing my opinion on shifting the emmissions burden on the wrong source to the EPA during the specific comment period they offered. If they only realized that unlike the factories that usually run countinously 24 hours, OHVs are only for a few hours at a time. Instead of being run all week, most OHVs are only run once or twice a week. So who ever informed the EPA on running time on OHVs was wrongly informed and most likely has never ridden anything more then a broomstick! Long live 2str's!!!
 

A-RustyDemon

~SPONSOR~
Dec 9, 2002
152
0
I'm sifting thought all 216 pages that pertains to ORV's. As soon as I decipher all the double speak I'll post what' what. Some very funny numbers so far.
 

lahatte

Member
Mar 24, 2003
1
0
I cannot understand how this "2 strokes are a problem" thing ever got started by the EPA. It must have been some yeahoos that don't like anything to do with any form of internal combustion engine. They attack any engine sources they can, and those smaller groups, like us, don't have the voice of the big automakers and poluting factories. Therefore, we wind up being the scapegoats without any representation.

It's just stupid, 100%. You cannot measure the amount of polution gases emitted by the two stroke engines in the world, when measured next to the other forms of polution. It is just laughable.
 

wayneg

~SPONSOR~
Aug 29, 2001
544
0
There are some rumours of one of the small trials companies (an Italian company called Beta) trying to use 'direct injection' on their two stroke trials bikes to get around the shift to four strokes instigated by the FIM. This would mean a two stroke with even less emissions than a normally carburetted four stroke. The best news is that if a system were developed to be fitted to a trials bike, then it would have be very light, and this would make it attractive for normal dirt bikes.
 

Bricks88

Sponsoring Member
Mar 14, 2002
70
0
As long as I own wrenches and dont have a stroke and can order parts I will ride a two stroke.I dont need a new ride every year, Im just happy to get out there :aj: Theres just something about"Being on the pipe" I will never give up. I dont mean crack pipe either :scream:
 

motometal

LIFETIME SPONSOR
Sep 3, 2001
2,682
3
does the epa deal with noise pollution? what about that?

any dictating of 2 stroke vs 4 by the epa indicates to me that someone has an agenda going. otherwise, why do they care HOW the engine works? dictate the standards, but not what equipment we may use to meet them.

so now they have "taken back" part of the legistlation that originally prompted the development of four strokes. If the whole four stroke thing never happened, we would probably have overall better bikes to ride by now, because instead of trying to make a 4 "as good" as a 2, more developement $$$ would have gone into the 2. :|
 
Top Bottom