Jump to content

Thoughts on this? Wisconsin (AWSC) stuff


Recommended Posts

I came across this earlier today, and curious what others think?  Personally, I don't see anything wrong other than I'm curious on the decibel impacts to older sleds (they should be grandfathered in, IMO).  Some of the social media response is kind of a mixed bag with a lot of people being pissed off (which I think is mostly because they don't actually read the article).


https://www.wjfw.com/storydetails/20210831140435/northwoods_legislators_push_to_modernize_snowmobile_requirements?fbclid=IwAR19MUk2Izu08SmkMUiuEOCvDPOokXvQREWd7PpZ71Ycj0fAoj334u47ACI

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those that don't want to click on the link:

Madison - Introduced by Rep. Rob Swearingen and a number of other Northwoods legislators, Assembly Bill 366/Senate Bill 364 would modernize snowmobile and ATV/UTV requirements. In particular, the bill would remove a 40-foot restriction on nighttime trails that run along marked highways, lower the maximum volume for snowmobiles, and require off-road vehicles to dim their lights when near oncoming traffic.

Current law requires a 10-foot separation between highways and marked snowmobile trails that would remain under the new law. The 40-foot requirement applies at night, when snowmobiles need to travel with traffic on trails 40 feet away from the roadway or when separated by a headlamp barrier.

"Eliminating the 40-feet requirement will bring Wisconsin law more in line with requirements in our neighboring states including Michigan and Minnesota," Swearingen said.


AB 366 would eliminate that requirement, allowing funding for trails that advocates say the current law excludes. Dave Newman, president of the Association of Wisconsin Snowmobile Clubs, listed portions of trails that are re-routed to avoid private property often run afoul of current law, and AB 366 would make them eligible for funding.

"AB 366 requirement that counter-directional travel at night only occur on a snowmobile trail preserves safe travel for both the snowmobilers and vehicle travel," said Newman.

In making that change, AB 366 would require snowmobiles traveling against traffic at night to dim their lights and stay on marked trails only.

Another change would lower the legally acceptable decibel level from 88db to 82db. AB 366 would also close a loophole that allows for after-market modified snowmobiles to operate on Wisconsin trails if those noise modifications were made out of state. Snowmobiles sold at vendors should be unaffected.

"No, anything that's manufactured would fit under that decibel level for that test," said Newman.

Some people raised concerns over the lack of barriers and close proximity on highways that run through towns.

"This may cause conflict and possibly unsafe passing beside motor vehicles due to headlight glare along town highways because it's common for snowmobiles to operate only feet from the roadway on town highways," said Martin Stone, off-highway vehicle administrator for the DNR.

Stone encouraged legislators to consider an amendment that would enforce the 40-feet requirement in towns.

"At night, they have to be separated or go with traffic," said Stone. "This bill would change that, and that would require them to be on a snowmobile trail and then they could go against traffic at night but there would be no distance requirement on those town highways."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Makes sense to me on both parts.  I know this is a broken record and gets debated every year but if we can keep the loud cans off the trail would help keep some land owners to give permission to run trails across their land.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't disagree with the no loud sleds movement, but it does concern me that some older sleds, even those made in the early 2000's it is getting harder to find a original oem supplied pipe or can. Aftermarket is the only thing left for some. Most of us old farts also know that a lite thumb can get you pass some places, but a open the hood checkpoint, can be costly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/8/2021 at 1:11 PM, Mag6240 said:

Makes sense to me - never understood why some would ride on the edges of roads against traffic, much less with traffic.

Yep.  I get that too but, unless those roadside trails are flat, there’s gonna be “flicker” and there’s nothing that can be done about that.

The noise thing is crap though.  88db is a good ednough threshold.  If these two proposals are bunched together, I hope they aren’t run through without proper diligence looking at yet another sound Ordinance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't really understand it.  It says sleds have to be on a trail along the road, so is there no ditch riding?  Like if there is not a trail along a road you can't ride in the ditch?

As for the Boise thing it's still going to come down to enforcement.  And the riders.  Even if in a quiet new stick machine, if you're one of those brappers with a Michael j Fox thumb, you're still going to piss off land owners.  As someone who lives on a trail and trail head, I frickin hate those ass clowns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The noise has to be addressed because it's killing the sport for everyone but I have no idea if lowering the threshold from 88dB to 82dB is the answer or will even make a difference.  Enforcement is the only way to stop the completely stupid shit that still goes on.  

Our club has discussed this topic many, many times and one idea that came up was through the registration process.  Sled has to meet sound reg's in order to carry a sticker and I agree there should be some leeway for older machines that owners have a hard time getting parts for but these dipshits that have to ride the crazy loud sleds on someone else's property would just keep riding modified old shit that does not have to meet the regs.  Something would have to eventually be done in these instances.  

And yes, some asshats will also just register a conforming sled and then take that muffler off to ride public trails but at least it met restrictions at one point in time and then make the penalties and fines much stiffer for registering a conforming sled and then subsequently modifying it afterword.  Establish a fund with those increased dollars for enforcement and for clubs to have money to compensate landowners in an effort to keep trails open for everyone else.  Those fuckwad's would then either just keep paying into the loud can fund until they can no longer register or ride a sled on public trails, eventually conform or just quit the sport and move on to something else they can enjoy while killing their ability to hear. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/8/2021 at 12:35 PM, Bontz said:

For those that don't want to click on the link:

 

fuck that, make them read a little.  

interestingly, there's more on his page https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2021/legislators/assembly/2202

  • 6/3/2021: 2021 Assembly Bill 372
    Relating to: passenger restrictions on all-terrain vehicles.

  • 5/27/2021: 2021 Assembly Bill 366
    Relating to: snowmobile noise and the operation of snowmobiles, all-terrain vehicles, and utility terrain vehicles near highways.

  • 5/27/2021: 2021 Assembly Bill 365
    Relating to: whip lights on all-terrain and utility terrain vehicles.

  • 5/25/2021: 2021 Senate Bill 368
    Relating to: passenger restrictions on all-terrain vehicles.

  • 5/25/2021: 2021 Senate Bill 364
    Relating to: snowmobile noise and the operation of snowmobiles, all-terrain vehicles, and utility terrain vehicles near highways.

  • 5/14/2021: 2021 Senate Bill 353
    Relating to: whip lights on all-terrain and utility terrain vehicles.

 

8 hours ago, jdsky said:

The noise has to be addressed because it's killing the sport for everyone but I have no idea if lowering the threshold from 88dB to 82dB is the answer or will even make a difference.  Enforcement is the only way to stop the completely stupid shit that still goes on.  

Our club has discussed this topic many, many times and one idea that came up was through the registration process.  Sled has to meet sound reg's in order to carry a sticker and I agree there should be some leeway for older machines that owners have a hard time getting parts for but these dipshits that have to ride the crazy loud sleds on someone else's property would just keep riding modified old shit that does not have to meet the regs.  Something would have to eventually be done in these instances.  

And yes, some asshats will also just register a conforming sled and then take that muffler off to ride public trails but at least it met restrictions at one point in time and then make the penalties and fines much stiffer for registering a conforming sled and then subsequently modifying it afterword.  Establish a fund with those increased dollars for enforcement and for clubs to have money to compensate landowners in an effort to keep trails open for everyone else.  Those fuckwad's would then either just keep paying into the loud can fund until they can no longer register or ride a sled on public trails, eventually conform or just quit the sport and move on to something else they can enjoy while killing their ability to hear. 

loud cans and riding off trail is the biggest gripe I hear about, and repeat.  snowmobiles in WI are predominantly on private property, and some fail to recognize that or give a shit.  Most imo aren't 'locals' and have no skin in the game, unlike those that have to go out and beg for permission.

also fwiw, at least loud sleds are running around in the winter when peoples windows are closed and most seasonal northwoods cottages are closed up, it's the fuckwads with loud exhaust on ORV's that made us stop hanging out at one friends cottage in NE Wisconsin and is making them (who live there year round) consider selling their place.  Heck, at my buddies place nestled into the boondocks of the Chequamegon in NE Wis. (and I mean literally miles away from a road or trail of any kind) you can hear the things that don't have stock exhaust like they are 100 yards away.  yeah, yeah, same can be said of Harleys, also a summertime issue. 

I agree on a year cutoff to an extent, but the older sleds with triple pipes and the F7 can-tards... those are loud and there's still plenty of them running around.

a law is only as good as it's enforcement, and I don't foresee WI setting up checkpoints for db tests like the UP

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I can't find the original article... but here's a copy/paste job of 'right to repair' from 2010 - not sure if it still applies but if I ever got a ticket for exhaust that isn't stock (like my 720 that requires a D&D pipe but stock muffler) but passed a db test I'd use it.

Aftermarket Exhausts - Legal?
By Olav Aaen
Published: September 17, 2010

Low impact - Today's sleds are well tuned and their exhaust systems meet government sound rules. But what about aftermarket exhausts? Are aftermarket exhausts legal to use on your snowmobile?

Many snowmobilers ask this question, and if you listen to law enforcement officers you would think that nothing but an OEM system is allowed. This has been a thorny issue in the snowmobile world for years, as many law enforcement officers do not even take the time to sound test your machine, but just open the hood and give you a citation if you have installed an aftermarket system.

Let's make one thing clear, aftermarket systems are legal as long as they meet the industry sound standards.

The legal part
Limiting a customer to buy only original equipment parts is itself illegal. It is against federal restraint of trade laws put in place to prevent monopolistic trade practices.

Imagine if you could only buy an original OEM muffler for your car, and every muffler shop, including Midas, Car-X and the corner shop were forced to close. The parts and installation costs would soar and make car dealership service managers smile from ear to ear.

"Restraint of Trade" legislation was put in place precisely to prevent monopolistic pricing by OEMs in all industries and foster competition in the marketplace.

In a landmark case, the Illinois Supreme Court reversed a previous lower court's $1 billion ruling against State Farm Insurance. Consumers had filed a class action lawsuit against the insurance firm for using aftermarket body parts in the repair of collision-damaged vehicles. The Supreme Court reversed the lower court's ruling, which was said to have kept the cost of collision repair artificially high and support an OEM monopoly.

The same applies to all aftermarket parts, whether they are fenders, mufflers, brakes, fan belts, filters, oil, pistons or any other replacement or performance product.

The political part

There have been a lot of problems with haphazard noise level enforcement throughout snowmobiling's history, at least since the mid-1960s. Early machines used primitive industrial engines with simple, not very quiet mufflers.

As the number of people enjoying our winter sport took off, complaints about noise increased. As more sophisticated manufacturers entered the market, some saw it as an opportunity to gain market share if they could produce quieter snowmobiles and the other players could be "banned." So, a fierce political struggle ensued and as a result some very restrictive sound levels were established for purely political reasons. No study was ever made or published that determined what sound level would actually be acceptable to the public. This condition exists even today.

Through a lot of activity by the ISR (International Snowmobile Racing) aftermarket group, the manufacturers, numerous clubs and state associations, the SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) and the DNR we now have a more reasonable sound level and a better testing procedure. However, the level set was still done so with political motives and is still probably 50% stricter than it needs to be.

The problem with reducing sound levels at the old 50-foot drive-by standard was not the exhaust, but all the mechanical clatter that became primary once the exhaust level was reduced below the 90 dB(A) level.

Some super quiet machines were rejected by the public because the mechanical clatter was so annoying that the machines were brought back to the dealers on a weekly basis to "fix the broken parts." As a result, those manufacturers that pushed for super quiet machines actually went out of business, while those who kept the sound level slightly above the "mechanical rattle limit" did well.

But sound really became a problem when not only some power happy kids installed racing exhausts and had fun racing down rivers at 2 a.m., but some manufacturers started selling really loud twin- and triple-powered performance sleds to gain an edge in the performance segment.

In the past there were some OEMs and some aftermarket players that sold by marketing excessive sound levels. This hit its peak in the late 1990s.

Not unjustified, the clubs who were threatened by trail closure, and state DNR officials jumped on the problem. When Wisconsin's DNR tried to do testing they found that the drive-by acceleration test was almost unusable in real world conditions, and they also found that there was a large difference in sound levels out there.

Sound studio - Arctic Cat has its own sound chamber to test its engine and exhaust systems to make sure they comply with all regulations.Loud pipes & sound testing
Even just 10 years ago some aftermarket pipes were very loud while others were quiet, and some manufacturers' performance sleds were way above the legal limit, while other makers' sleds were quiet. Making a quiet exhaust while maintaining good performance is not mutually exclusive, because 2-stroke exhausts thrive on back pressure. A performance exhaust also can be quiet, and lightweight if it's designed correctly.

While all this was going on, ISR's aftermarket division designed a new test procedure that could be used at racetracks to control new race silencer rules. The test had to be stationary, and the engine revved to a certain rpm and measurements taken at a set distance. It was quickly determined that the 20-inch motorcycle test picks up too many variables because of mechanical noises and sharp pressure pulses. This evened out as the distance increased.

The first ISR test used a 4-foot distance with the engine running at 3,000 rpm. After awhile the DNR and their SAE consultants also recommended a stationary test, but at a larger distance of 6.2 meters (157.5 inches or 13 ft., 1.5 in.) at 4,000 rpm. The new maximum limit was increased to 88 dB(A) because the test is conducted at a much closer 13 ft. distance. The former drive-by test limit was 78 dB(A) at 50 ft., but the two procedures should be comparable.

After many public hearings, the process culminated at a meeting in Wausau, Wis., on Dec. 15, 2003 at the University of Wisconsin's Marathon County campus. Representatives from the manufacturers, ISR aftermarket group, snowmobile clubs, SAE and the DNR were present, and the new DNR-sponsored SAE test was agreed on as a much improved field test.

The new and more practical sound test is now in place, and gives all manufacturers an easier way to test and certify their products. The new (SAE J-2567) test also makes it easier for aftermarket manufacturers to develop legal sound systems. Most aftermarket exhausts now meet these new standards, so there should be no reason to get a ticket.

The verdict
It's definitely not illegal to install an aftermarket exhaust, if it meets the new sound standard. In order to issue an excessive sound citation, an officer must also test the sound level. The sound test is simple, and the equipment necessary costs less than $1,000, so there is no excuse for a law enforcement officer not to have one available.

Some areas see ticketing snowmobiles for sound violations as an easy source of income, and they are counting on you just paying the ticket rather than going to court, because many may not be aware of the new sound test procedure. Going to court without a sound reading, would be the same as getting a speeding ticket without a radar reading, and the case will likely be thrown out for lack of evidence.

Remember that if an officer just lifts your snowmobile's hood and gives you a ticket for a non-OEM exhaust, he is in violation of federal restraint of trade laws and is engaging in discriminatory and monopolistic actions. Ask the officer to perform the test, and if he or she refuses, or doesn't have the equipment, you should have grounds for challenging a ticket in court.

We have found that in other areas, such as the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, DNR officers do not bother with sound readings, but are heavy on checking riders' alcohol levels. Here the attitude is, "No one died from a loud pipe, but excessive alcohol use is a major contributing factor in deadly accidents."

The Michigan attitude is a welcome one, as alcohol related fatal accidents is black mark on our sport and every year attracts much negative press. If law enforcement would concentrate more effort in this area, the trails would be safer and more lives saved.

Final word?
It is NOT illegal to buy an aftermarket exhaust system that meets the sound standard, and you can still have fun on the snow with your modified sled

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/12/2021 at 10:11 AM, jdsky said:

The noise has to be addressed because it's killing the sport for everyone but I have no idea if lowering the threshold from 88dB to 82dB is the answer or will even make a difference.  Enforcement is the only way to stop the completely stupid shit that still goes on.  

Our club has discussed this topic many, many times and one idea that came up was through the registration process.  Sled has to meet sound reg's in order to carry a sticker and I agree there should be some leeway for older machines that owners have a hard time getting parts for but these dipshits that have to ride the crazy loud sleds on someone else's property would just keep riding modified old shit that does not have to meet the regs.  Something would have to eventually be done in these instances.  

And yes, some asshats will also just register a conforming sled and then take that muffler off to ride public trails but at least it met restrictions at one point in time and then make the penalties and fines much stiffer for registering a conforming sled and then subsequently modifying it afterword.  Establish a fund with those increased dollars for enforcement and for clubs to have money to compensate landowners in an effort to keep trails open for everyone else.  Those fuckwad's would then either just keep paying into the loud can fund until they can no longer register or ride a sled on public trails, eventually conform or just quit the sport and move on to something else they can enjoy while killing their ability to hear. 

Or you just skip the part about testing when you register (that would be a nightmare) and just really make the fine severe.  In the thousands of dollars.  Why not?  You don't accidentally break that law.  And how much does it hurt an industry and a community if a trail closes.  You wouldn't need crazy enforcement efforts if you have a very stiff penalty.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, mnstang said:

Or you just skip the part about testing when you register (that would be a nightmare) and just really make the fine severe.  In the thousands of dollars.  Why not?  You don't accidentally break that law.  And how much does it hurt an industry and a community if a trail closes.  You wouldn't need crazy enforcement efforts if you have a very stiff penalty.

Totally agree.  Thousand dollar plus fines would put a stop to that shit in a hurry.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Trying to pay the bills, lol

×
×
  • Create New...