Initial plans are to go and observe how testing is actually done. One is about 5 miles where I work. My argument above may be insufficient. Curious if my set up will measure 95 db at 50 ft so I will go and have a state referee measure as is. Not sure how much it'll cost me. If under I'm good and will fight it to void the fine. Ticket was issued in Nov of 2018 so it is not 1k. If over 95 I will fix to get it under 95 and certified.

Best of luck https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.u...ssed_1f91e.png
Keep us posted. If you get certifed without having to change anything, I would keep a copy of the certification in your car.

sub'd

This. There are some cops with a power-trip, but I'm inclined to believe a lot of let drivers off the hook more than we realize.

I'm sure a fair share can understand the difference between someone having open fun, and someone actually putting other drivers in danger. It's a bit of unwritten law. Cops can have their own builds too. Of course, if they see someone blatantly doing 150+, they're gonna have to do their job. Same goes if there is a clear violation of equipment per state.

I do get annoyed in CA knowing I spent money making sure an OEM Nismo Exhaust install was done flawlessly with all fresh small parts at a dealer, just so I know I'm good in the future for inspection, when in another state it could've been put towards a better-performing exhaust. But yeah, emissions has been a real problem, and there are problematic street racers.

But it's also a good perspective check. If I want a faster car, I better save up for one. As cool as a turbo build could be, and any builds in general to make your car your own (I mean I would want to do a lot of mods), it's not entirely practical spending.

Time to start playing around with removable baffles.

3db is like 22% increase in noise. The difference between 80db to 90db is HUGE.

It's 2019, you don't need to make noise to generate power. Quiet down, find a way to make your power without ruining it for everyone. There is a reason why Laguna Seca cap most track days at 90DB, loud cars are annoying.

Sound requirements have been around for a long time with different bodies of water and boats. The equipment for getting an accurate measure of sound has gotten better as well. In the past keep the sound meter calibrated was as issue for LE. The biggest thing now for LE is getting the distance to the vehicle from where the get their reading. I am suspecting most will do it from a know location.

I think there is a point where we all agree that it is just noise a becomes more of an annoyance than pleasure. Ddbs are a logarithmic calculation and so each increase or decrease in dbs is significant because it is exponential. I am see several company making cut outs to deal with the noise issue.

"There is a reason why Laguna Seca cap most track days at 90DB"

This only had do with rich people moving in next to a track that had been there for a long time. Prime property and the owners have enough money and power to get the noise level changed. This has happened with flight paths for air planes and shooting ranges. I spent much of my career dealing with the NIMBY effect when the State owned shooting range had been there for decades and the city came to it and people where powerful enough to get some ranges shut down. Fortunately there was a law past to protect shooting ranges from unreasonable attacks from the public.

Watching the video again. You should do the tests in the open. Not in the garage. Because the sound bouncing around. If they ever test you. Make sure it's in the open, not in an alley.

Spot on! We had to make sure we were not in canyon or had a mountain or casino behind us. Really the only citations that I or others issued to watercraft operators were ones that were so over the top that they knew it. Most the time we just told people they had to get off the water.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

I'm a charter life member of the American Motorcycle Assoc. Years ago. I remember reading an article of the noise issue in the member magazine. The police in one town was pulling over bikes will loud pipes and testing them in an alley. Where they was getting really high dB readings. A bunch of the riders got together and file a lawsuit against the town. The riders won, but it took years and a ton of money.

Yep, this a bad example of community policing! If the real issue is street corner/intersection take overs it seems to me that more could have been done in the vain of community policing and hopefully that is coming.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

I get it and you are not 100% wrong, but I am not going to defend a piece of **** 100hp Miata running open pipes. It’s not necessary and uncalled for. If people would just be reasonable about how they do things, We would have a lot less rules. I am happy my stock exhaust can stay under the dB meter reading and be just as fast as the guy with the fart cans next to me.

Oh yeah loud motorcycles are just there to satisfy their own egos, or they are trying to turn on the other guys around them. There is nothing worse than the rolling tards strolling though your neighborhood.

I think we are more in agreement than what our comments may appear to state. I have a 150whp miata with that is straight piped. I just ran it at a track that has a 96db limit and it passed no problem. The guy I bought it from ran it at Laguna Seca with no issues as well. He also provided me with a silencer. Not hard to get the noises down to a reasonable level. I think the only difference we might have are what is the right db level and I don't know if we would be that far apart either.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Let's not get side tracked here. Were talking about AB 1824 where starting in Jan 2019 a fix it no longer applies for those cited with loud exhaust. CA VC 27151 states modded exhaust are ok provided it does not go past 95 dBs. 90 dBs on the track is something I wouldn't touch on and totally different. I'm also not going to get into discussing my choice of mods as an ethusiast and perhaps how my so called loud exhaust ruins it for everyone else. Since when did anyone consider FI exhaust to be noisy anyway?

Rusty, you're right, I'll test outside and get another reading. Not sure what the physical conditions and parameters are when state referees perform testing though. There may not be much of a difference considering how close the mic is to the tail pipe. We'll see..


My contention is any officer who cites an enthusiast for a loud exhaust is saying he or she is in violation and must therefore fix it and pay the fines associated with it. My challenge is, how did the officer determine that the vehicle's exhaust exceeds 95dBs. It is only when a true measurement is made using a calibrated meter that one can determine if one is in violation or not. In other words the enthusiast's are assumed to be in violation by the officer. Case in point, an officer cannot say you are legally drunk without performing certain tests. If you fail the tests, that's when they get you. In terms of dB ratings, it is a wild guess, an estimation made by an officer that the vehicle's exhaust exceeds 95dbs (measured 19.5 inches from the tail pipe, 45 degrees, and level to the tailpipe). There is nothing in the VC that says an estimation made by the officer will suffice. The testing procedure and the device is simply too precise for an officer to accurately state during a stop to make that determination.

Thoughts?

If you get pulled over and the officer says you are too loud and doesn't have a meter to test you. You could then take it to court and you can ask when was the last time he had his hearing checked by a doctor. Put the burden of proof on the officer and his hearing. Everyone has a hearing lost over the years. Some more then others.

This a conversation best severed with alcohol lol. I am not in disagreement about how the law is enforced or not. There should be a standard procedure for testing a vehicle's exhaust sound level if the stop is made without an officer getting the sound from a position the meets with the standard set forth by the law.

On Rusty's point about an officer's hearing may not be a very strong case because if with my hearing I say it's loud well it is loud lol. The other way law enforcement agencies deal with such things is to apply training. They simply have a number of vehicles that are over and under the limit and test officers accuracy. Officers then will be told to only stop vehicles that are way above the limit if the situation doesn't allow for the sound to be captured properly with the sound equipment and then the vehicle should be tested per protocol.

Issues for law enforcement are getting all of this to line up. Also they have deal with how long they detaining the operator. They cannot hold you forever or make you take unreasonable steps to get to a conclusion. Believe me these type of policies or laws that come down from on high are not popular with those that have to do the enforcement as well. I have real world experience with laws such as this and there is no win for reasonable people. I don't consider the FI exhaust to be over the top but when laws like this happen....innocent people are turned into criminals!

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

I'm feeling good about this Bob.:tup:

Let me know ahead of time if you'll be in the area.

Will do brother...it has been way to long!

I just ask the officer to kindly place his/her ear down next to my exhaust pipe. Then if their hearing is impaired permanently when I peel off they can write me a ticket if they catch up to me.

:twocents:

This is in Texas, mind you...

Its Cali, nobody cares about cali, also nothing has really changed:

A.B. 1824 amended how excess exhaust noise violations are handled by law enforcement. Beginning this year, a vehicle cited for violating the current exhaust noise law will no longer receive what is known as a “fix-it” ticket. Instead, violations will result in an immediate fine.

Today I plead not guilty and have a plan to fight the alleged VC 27151a. Not saying I am confident but have a plan and will execute my simple approach. Got a sense from the judge that no one has ever attempted to fight it. She was a little perplexed. There were 5 of us who went in for a 27151 and I am the only one who plead not guilty. Everyone else plead guilty and had a referee sign off and paid the fine. I relish being the only one going against the grain. We shall see.

How much is the fine Raf? My car is back to stock now but I see guys running around with loud exhaust all day in OC. I guess cops around here are more relaxed?

I have a good contact who is a traffic attorney, let me know if you’d be interested in getting in touch with him.

Kudos for standing against this.

My argument would hinge on two things:

1) Challenging the legitimacy of a cop making a "professional assessment". What experience or certificates qualify them to make sound assessments? Also, what tools were used at the stop to verify it?

2) Bringing 2 or more independent acoustic reports signed off by technicians. I'd go to muffler shops and ask them to meter the sound. Muffler shops may not have the meters so providing them with two different meters of your own is best.

The goal is to have the judge decide between agreeing with the cop or with the technicians.

Here is what I put together to prepare and present when I went to fight the ticket, fines, and fix it.

Traffic and Road Conditions
Do you recall the time I was stopped for the alleged violation of 27151?
Do you recall the road conditions when you stopped me for the alleged violation of 27151?
Do you recall the traffic conditions when you stopped me for the alleged violation of 27151?

Description: It was approximately between 5:45 PM – 6:00 PM on xx-xx-xxxx. It was already dark, and traffic was moderate at the speed limit. People were heading home from work along xxxxx Blvd. towards the ### Freeway. There were many cars around me. Did you notice the loud exhaust coming from the Dodge Challenger and the Ford Mustang that were ahead of me?
When you stepped off your patrol vehicle to stop me, was the engine of the 370Z running? My engine was off. Officer stopped me for VC27151.

Alleged violation of VC 27151
27151.

(a) No person shall modify the exhaust system of a motor vehicle in a manner which will amplify or increase the noise emitted by the motor of the vehicle so that the vehicle is not in compliance with the provisions of Section 27150 or exceeds the noise limits established for the type of vehicle in Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 27200). No person shall operate a motor vehicle with an exhaust system so modified.
(b) For the purposes of exhaust systems installed on motor vehicles with a manufacturer’s gross vehicle weight rating of less than 6,000 pounds, other than motorcycles, a sound level of 95 dbA or less, when tested in accordance with Society of Automotive Engineers Standard J1169 May 1998, complies with this section. Motor vehicle exhaust systems or parts thereof include, but are not limited to, nonoriginal exhaust equipment.
(Amended by Stats. 2001, Ch. 92, Sec. 10. Effective January 1, 2002.)
27150.

(a) Every motor vehicle subject to registration shall at all times be equipped with an adequate muffler in constant operation and properly maintained to prevent any excessive or unusual noise, and no muffler or exhaust system shall be equipped with a cutout, bypass, or similar device.
(b) Except as provided in Division 16.5 (commencing with Section 38000) with respect to off-highway motor vehicles subject to identification, every passenger vehicle operated off the highways shall at all times be equipped with an adequate muffler in constant operation and properly maintained so as to meet the requirements of Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 27200), and no muffler or exhaust system shall be equipped with a cutout, bypass, or similar device.
(c) The provisions of subdivision (b) shall not be applicable to passenger vehicles being operated off the highways in an organized racing or competitive event conducted under the auspices of a recognized sanctioning body or by permit issued by the local governmental authority having jurisdiction.


Under VC 27150:

Ask officer:
Did you establish if I had an adequate muffler and if it was properly maintained?
Did you check if I have a cut out or a bypass or a similar device?
Did you check underneath the vehicle to determine if I had any improperly maintained exhaust?

VC 27150 is also about maintaining an adequate muffler. The officer did not establish that. He could not have because it was dark and did not conduct the proper inspection to determine if it was “adequate or proper”. He did not look underneath the vehicle. How else can anyone establish if there was an adequate muffler and if it was properly maintained unless someone checks underneath.

Ask officer:
Did you ask me to open the hood of the vehicle?
Did you determine if there were any illegal modifications to the engine? Illegal exhausts?
Didn’t you discover that I had a CA Air Resources Board Certified sticker (CARB Certified) on my vehicle when you asked me to open the hood?

Officer saw CARB sticker on the cold air intake which meant that the part installed on the vehicle meets or exceeds the air quality standards and the part complies with the State’s stringent emissions standards.

Under section B of VC 27151:

For the purposes of exhaust systems installed on motor vehicles with a manufacturer’s gross vehicle weight rating of less than 6,000 pounds, other than motorcycles, a sound level of 95 dbA or less, when tested in accordance with Society of Automotive Engineers Standard J1169 May 1998, complies with this section. Motor vehicle exhaust systems or parts thereof include, but are not limited to, non-original exhaust equipment.

Ask officer:

Do you recall stating to me that I have exceeded a sound level of 95 decibels and that it was illegal?
How loud am I speaking right now?
During the conditions at the time of the stop:
How did you determine that I have exceeded 95 decibels?
Did you have an “SAE-certified” instrument to determine if I have exceeded 95 decibels?

CHP Bulletin 98-100 states that not all exhaust modifications are prohibited. As long as the vehicle does not exceed the standards set under 27150. The CHP also states that officers cannot issue a citation simply because the sound emitted is different that the original factory installed muffler.
Under the law (27150), I am required to properly maintain my exhaust. I have. I did not install anything such as a bypass or a cutout or a whistle tip which I know are illegal. These things are loud. I’ve heard them for myself the they startle me when vehicles that have them pass me by. In fact, officer Xxxxx did not inspect my vehicle to determine if these were installed, I do not have any of these illegal modifications. Another fact is I had a CARB certified parts in the vehicle.

Officer xxxxx alleged that the vehicle exceeded 95 decibels. If he did not inspect the vehicle, then he must have entrusted his ears to determine that I have exceeded 95 decibels under the Society of Automotive Engineers Standard testing standard J1169 (which be the way is being updated under J14962). This is not possible. The human ear is not a precise instrument. He did not have a meter to determine that I had exceeded 95 decibels. Handing a citation and asking me to go to a State Referee and pay for the testing to determine if I have in fact exceeded the 95-decibel limit is a presumption of a violation.
It is unfair to give me a citation stating that I have violated VC 27151 based on the facts presented. I do not want to pay the citation given these conditions, I also do not want to pay for the fees to test my vehicle when the violation was not accurately established. I therefore request that the citation be dropped.

Outcome: The judge compromised after hearing my case. It was clear to me that in the judge's courtroom, no one has challenged this citation ever.
The judge pulled the book and reviewed the vehicle code on 27150 and 27151 and asked the officer if he had video evidence (none), if he inspected underneath (his response was I don't remember LOL).

Judge offered pay $200 and no BAR inspection ($80), no fix-it ($$400-600 to take out before BAR inspection and back on after)........and no insane fine (up to $1000). Said yes before she could finish her sentence.

Good work, Raf. Not a true win, but still a good outcome I say. Cheers for taking on the powers that be! :tiphat: :tup:

:iagree:

Way to go Raf...I would say it's a win given that many times Judges aren't going to let you go without paying something even if it is minimal.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

:iagree:

I'm a little mixed on that outcome. You lost time and literally proved not-guilty to what you was being charged for — as I understand it — but I guess avoiding further inspection saves an immense amount of headache.

Update on Assembly bill AB 1824
California Bill To Amend 2018 Exhaust Noise Law Passes Legislature | SEMA ACTION NETWORK

Do you not have an exhaust system that pleases not only your ears but your other senses? Avoidance means OEM exhaust or even worse a basic rattle can. Not me and the many others on this forum amigo.

This is great. My donation to change.org did well. Will feel much better once signed by Newsome.