Harleys stock are actually under the legal noise limit (80 decibels i think?) and are generally that loud due to straight exhaust and a specific cam shaft they use to squeeze more performance out of them. My understanding is folks prefer them to be loud so that they can be better noticed by cars and get hit less often.
Dirt bikes are around 100 decibels, perform like trash and shouldn't be on the freeway near cars in the first place.
Here in Puerto Rico we have herds (20-200) of two stroke bikes that ride together at night for fun. I would gladly trade them for 1000 Harley-Davidsons.
"My understanding is folks prefer them to be loud so that they can be better noticed by cars and get hit less often."
As a member of a motorcycle riding family in the US (I don't ride, but several close family members do) this is hilariously wrong. They like it loud because they like the sound, and they like to get noticed. I say hilariously because I constantly joke with my family members about how silly the bike culture is, and to give full credit to them; they agree.
Ha, It did smell like a cop-out when I was told it, but a reasonable enough cop-out that I figured it was at least one form of attention they were after in the process of getting attention from onlookers.
Whenever I am stuck in stop and go traffic, I can hear/feel lane splitting harleys coming from way behind. Sportbikes just whiz by, making you jump, especially if you were thinking of changing lanes.
I don't believe 'loud pipes save lives' is completely bogus.
If it were really about saving lives, then the rational thing would be to use a safer form of transportation. Hazards like pot holes and debris are unmitigated by the sound of the vehicle, while other types of vehicles can have safety features a bike can't.
>>ROI on some training and awareness would be far higher.
Motorcycle people generally spend money to placard their cars up with "Watch out for motorcyclists!" stickers so unless you're insinuating the government should use public funds to educate drivers on checking their mirrors and not getting into accidents with motorcyclists I'm not sure what you're actually saying.
Training quantifiably lowers risk - I'm talking about training for motorcyclists. We all have to do some training pretty much everywhere in the world before we become licensed drivers and riders.
In both the UK and US, advanced training courses are available and are recognized my insurance companies who offer discounts.
Anecdotally, the people that I've picked up off the highway have all been on a cruiser-style bike, been wearing improper clothing (usually shorts and T-Shirts) and not been wearing a helmet. Now that's legal here in CO and fine for an individual to make their own decisions. With further training however, you can make better decisions particularly around risk assessment and handling characteristics.
OK but individual motorcycle riders are not in a position to train and raise awareness in a way that makes them safe. So from the rider’s perspective, there is no good alternative.
While that may be true there are plenty free or close to free resources on the internet on in libraries and plenty of local friendly groups that often have a focus on advanced riding.
For the folks who are riding around on $20-40k worth of bike with illegal and noisy aftermarket pipes - that they paid for - it's not really an excuse.
It’s not either-or. There are situations where advanced riding will not protect you, but being more noisy will. Plenty of disciplined, advanced riders also choose to be noisier with aftermarket addons, especially on smaller bikes. It’s a trade off that riders make between increasing their safety and being less obnoxious. It’s reasonable as a pedestrian to be annoyed at those that choose the former, but you can’t just dismiss their decision on the grounds that it’s useless- that’s objectively false.
When I used to ride all my problems with other motorists came from people approaching me from behind or to the side, not from me coming up behind people (perhaps because I was not in the habit of lane splitting at every opportunity). I suggest a horn serves the same function without annoying everyone nearby and eventually deafening the rider.
Being heard can help with cars approaching from the side, for example a car moving into your lane while failing to see you.
It’s not a silver bullet but it’s one more layer of safety and I don’t understand why that statement is so controversial? I’m not even advocating for these after-market mods (I don’t use one) just pointing out that there is in fact a tradeoff.
Now, some riders just like being loud for the sake of it, and that is a whole different story.
If “loud pipes save(d) lives”, your insurance company would give a discount for straight pipes. Instead they give a discount if you’ve taken a training course and have ABS. It is bullshit spouted by man-children that just want to attract attention, dishonestly disguised as a safety issue.
This is a very good point. In fact, I'd imagine insurance companies would actually be very interested to know that a bike is being ridden with illegal modifications...
> folks prefer them to be loud so that they can be better noticed by cars and get hit less often
If you want to do something that’s too dangerous to do without infuriating everyone around you, maybe you just shouldn’t do it.
I don’t think those super loud exhausts are stock either. There are tons of bikers who replace the stock pipes with the loudest ones they can find. I don’t get it at all.
Motorcycles reduce congestion and emit less carbon emissions than SUVs, sedans, trucks, etc. Sure, loud exhausts shouldn't be used, but banning them without addressing the problem of incompetent drivers only further encourages a bygone car culture that is already arguably too pervasive in our society.
As a side note, this line of thinking "[it infuriates others so] maybe you shouldn't do it" leans totalitarian which in turn leads to suboptimal outcomes (since no one person or even organization knows the optimal way of living or organizing society -- e.g. no mortals can play "god" so to speak). Also, many people are "infuriated" by trivial things, so it's not always a good way to live life imagining who these ambiguous others are and also to placate to their imagined sensibilities.
I'm not suggesting a ban on motorcycles. I'm a motorcyclist myself but I use the stock exhausts because they are quiet. I do want to ban excessively loud exhausts, or more simply, I want the police to enforce the existing noise pollution laws.
I think that an important part of being a decent human being living in close proximity to other human beings is recognizing and limiting one's own anti-social behavior. I hope that's not a controversial statement.
I think you're right about the straight pipes being after market, but I believe the noise generally comes from the engine configuration firing at uneven intervals that make it unusually distinct.
While they are under the legal noise limit, the low frequency of harleys travels significantly easier through obstacles, making them seem louder inside a house or around a wall / fence / bush than a higher frequency noise at the same dB.
I'm definitely not arguing that 2-stroke is quieter though. Just that it's not quite an apples to apples comparison due to both variables having an impact.
Dirt bikes are around 100 decibels, perform like trash and shouldn't be on the freeway near cars in the first place.
Here in Puerto Rico we have herds (20-200) of two stroke bikes that ride together at night for fun. I would gladly trade them for 1000 Harley-Davidsons.