| Author | Message | ||
     Vitalc |
Hi guys, great forum, happy to be here. I have a problem. I want to bring in an 2005 XB12 from out of state into California. Bike has a few 100 miles on the clock only. Can I register it in California after the necessary modification (basically add the canister) or is there simply no way if the bike has less than 7500 miles on the clock? | ||
| Nuerburgringer |
If you are moving to California, and bringing your out-of-state bike with you, its possible. But if you are a California resident, and trying to bring in a low-mileage federal emissions bike from out-of-state, I am unaware of any exception to the 7500 mile rule. I've heard of cases of buyers altering the clock, attempting to register, and ending up in legal trouble too, so do your homework, and calculate your risks. I handle all of the DMV paperwork for my family's GM dealership, central California; been dealing with these issues for +10 years. | ||
| Midknyte |
If you are a current resident of CA, then no. Gotta have 7500 miles on the ticker. Good news tho, you won't have to modify one that does. If you a non CA resident, moving to CA, you may bring your vehicle in with you regardless of mileage. (Message edited by midknyte on January 11, 2007) | ||
| Nuerburgringer |
I should have clarified, it is not the lack of CA smog equipment per se that is at issue, but rather the VIN identifying the bike as federal emissions. Adding the smog equipment won't getcha there. Yes, makes no sense at all, but we're dealing with a government here. Interestingly enough, out-of-state bikes that are built with 50-state emissions suffer no such restriction. For example, you can bring in a low-mileage late model Guzzi with no problems, but not a Buell. Wish I had better news for ya... (Message edited by nuerburgringer on January 11, 2007) | ||
| Vitalc |
Thanks, that was very helpful and quick. I guess I was very surprised to learn that a modern bike, designed and manufactured in the US bike was not 50 state legal. Oh well. | ||
| Aeholton |
I guess I was very surprised to learn that a modern bike, designed and manufactured in the US bike was not 50 state legal. That's because California is totally unreasonable. | ||
| Teeps |
Nuerburgringer Posted on Thursday, January 11, I am unaware of any exception to the 7500 mile rule. There is one; ignorance of DMV personel. | ||
| Nuerburgringer |
--There is one; ignorance of DMV personel-- Actually, I don't believe that's one either. Their computer can flag a non-50-state bike by VIN, regardless of which DMV employee is at the keyboard. That software they're using nowadays has gotten to be fairly powerful. Otherwise you're right, any given DMV employee has a remarkable power of oversight. Of course, they'll never tell you that... (Message edited by nuerburgringer on January 11, 2007) (Message edited by nuerburgringer on January 11, 2007) | ||
| Metalstorm |
"That's because California is totally unreasonable." To steal Court's line: That is an accurate statement | ||
| Microchop |
I have an exception. My bike is a 49 state (would have passed on it had I known) I bought it from a wholesaler in CA. 59 miles. I hung the canister on it, had it inspected by the CHP and they signed off. I know they shouldn't have, but they did. - Jason | ||
| Humboldtblast |
ahh yes the cali hoops...well my friend you could just ride it until 7500 miles but dont go to the DMV and go thru the reg process THEY WILL RED TAG YOUR BIKE!!! and depends on where you live too. Yes it is a hassel but dont you love your bike? Good luck! | ||
| Nuerburgringer |
--I hung the canister on it, had it inspected by the CHP and they signed off.-- No idea how that coulda happened. Its not the same as making a dirt bike or special-construction bike street "legal". The computer should've red-flagged your VIN immediately, with no recourse. The CHP is not responsible for emissions stuff, but rather horns, mirrors, etc. For what its worth, CA is going after gray-plated dirtbikes now too. For those who've got them, enjoy 'em while you can, briefly. That loophole has pretty much closed, and things are gonna get a whole light tighter under Arnold the Governator. | ||
| Teeps |
Nuerburgringer, The DMV inspector and computer should have "recognized" the 49st vin on a buddy's Honda VTX (with less than 500 miles); but neither one did, or didn't care. In all he made 2 trips to DMV and one to CHP (to verify the vin) and he was taxed, tagged and plated... and on the road. There is a speedo shop in Palo Alto, by the same name, in CA. that can change the mileage on a digital odo as easy as changing a shirt. Just cost a few bones is all. | ||
| Nuerburgringer |
--There is a speedo shop in Palo Alto, by the same name, in CA. that can change the mileage on a digital odo as easy as changing a shirt. Just cost a few bones is all.-- Uh, Congress made odometer tampering a felony in 1986, and has progressively stiffened the legislation and its enforcement over the years, heavily reinforced by accompanying CA legislation/enforcement. If Palo Alto (or its customers) get caught altering a speedo to skirt any law, we're talkin' hand-cuffs, and since we're talkin' about defrauding the State of California in this case, you're lookin' at multiple-jurisdictions. Enforcement is via "customers" hired by relevant agencies to act undercover, and is quite common. Once an offender is caught in the snare, investigators go through the books with a microscope for violators on both ends. You're dancing with the devil, Teeps. Enforcement is aggressive nowadays. Go here for the statutes: http://www.access.gpo.gov/uscode/title49/subtitlev i_partc_chapter327_.html (Message edited by nuerburgringer on January 13, 2007) (Message edited by nuerburgringer on January 13, 2007) | ||
| Teeps |
Thats a good link, thanks for clearing that up. I knew that tampering with an odometer was a no no too. But, there is a provision for service and/or replacement. | ||
| Rhun |
"For what its worth, CA is going after gray-plated dirtbikes now too." What is a gray plate???? | ||
| Nuerburgringer |
--What is a gray plate????-- There has been a loophole in California in recent years allowing owners of non-street-legal dirtbikes to attain street-legality by adding superficial lights/signals/horn/mirrors to their bikes, having them "inspected" by a CHP field station, and registering for street. The EPA and CARB have dropped the hammer on this loophole, and the DMV is incrementally going after these "gray plate" bikes, primarily by denying renewals. It won't happen all at once, but has begun. Their justification is based on emissions concerns. I understand that acquiring a gray plate has already become impossible, although I have no immediate experience. In any case, I apologize to Teeps for coming off as a know-it-all. I am a self-described idiot in too many ways to count, but a licensed CA emissions and brake/lamp inspector, dealing regularly with our beloved DMV, BAR, and CARB, so I have some knowledge in this particular case. One footnote on the Palo Alto speedo shop: I've actually done business with them in the past, although our GM dealership normally uses a different speedo shop. Such shops are heavily regulated, and must follow a stringent protocol; proof of mileage is mandatory documentation nowadays. Doctoring the paperwork is still possible of course, but few shops are gonna be willing parties to fraud; there's simply too much for them to lose, and too many ways to get nailed. I think its fair to say that we all long for the good ol' days in certain ways. | ||
| Sleez |
it was my understanding that there would be no new "gray" pates, but existing ones would be allowed to re-reg! maybe not? | ||
| Teeps |
Nuerburgringer Posted on Monday, January 15, 2007 - In any case, I apologize to Teeps for coming off as a know-it-all. I am a self-described idiot in too many ways to count, but a licensed CA emissions and brake/lamp inspector, dealing regularly with our beloved DMV, BAR, and CARB, so I have some knowledge in this particular case. No need to apologize for being right. I work with a room full of know-it-all engineers (self proclaimed and otherwise), getting "righted" is sometimes a daily thing. I have really thick skin for that sort of thing. The part about denying registration renewal, if true, will be a bummer for several people I know with just such registrations. | ||
| Nuerburgringer |
--it was my understanding that there would be no new "gray" plates, but existing ones would be allowed to re-reg! maybe not?-- I know of at least two Bay Area riders who've had their gray plates revoked, so it is happening, although I do not know to what extent. I'll ask our BAR guy next time he's around. | ||
| Krassh |
From what I understand the discussion that has been floating around the KTMTalk website. There was a cut off for legally registering off-road bikes for street use. I believe it was Dec. 2003 or Feb 2004, somewhere in that range. The problem is some owners and shops (Mainly shops) where registering bikes illegally as part of the bike purchase. These are the people CARB is going after. There have even been reports of CARB officials going to the registered owners residence and demanding the plates. The red flag I have heard that started most of this were the idiots registering Quads and golf carts. Then they dug deeper and started going after the two wheeled variety. Unless something changes those that registered their bikes before the cut off are ok. Here is a link with a quote from an AMA District 36 rep. http://ktmtalk.com/index.php?showtopic=183977&hl=c alifornia | ||
| Nuerburgringer |
The two riders that I mentioned were on newer bikes, so Krassh's information'd fit. My guess is that the cut-off is the 2004 model year, as that was the beginning of phase one of the new CA motorcycle emissions legislation, supposedly culminating in smog inspections beginning 2008. Lovely. Anyhoo, for those of you who care for that genre, Husqvarna began building 50-state street-legal dirtbikes for 2006, and KTM has a coupla models for 2007, so the market is responding. I own a 2006 Husqvarna SMR450 supermoto that's CA street-legal. Took a lotta fiddling to get it to run right. It actually had a restrictor in the carburetor slide! If it were required to pass an emissions test at this point, it would not. Hopefully we all have a few years left before annual inspections hit us hard. I doubt if there'll be retroactive inspections, but one never knows in this state. Lotsa talk that there may be a decibel component to the inspection as well, so far only rumor. Sigh... (Message edited by nuerburgringer on January 15, 2007) | ||
| Thespive |
My insurance agent just got a "Street Legal" Husky, except it came with the wrong EPA sticker from the factory, eventhough it is a California bike. He is having a hell of a time sorting it all out. --Sean | ||
| Teeps |
Nuerburgringer Posted on Monday, January 15, 2007 Hopefully we all have a few years left before annual inspections hit us hard. I doubt if there'll be retroactive inspections, but one never knows in this state.Lotsa talk that there may be a decibel component to the inspection as well, so far only rumor. Sigh... Which is why I never do any non reversible mods to my stuff. All those guys that modify their mufflers and air-box covers, could be in for a rude awaking. (Message edited by teeps on January 16, 2007) | ||
| Nuerburgringer |
--Which is why I never do any non reversible mods to my stuff.-- I do likewise. It astonishes me how many riders toss their original muffler, particularly in CA. There is very powerful momentum toward ever-more-intrusive enforcement on the noise/emissions end here, making those OEM pieces valuable. Matters will not improve, unless we elect an avid motorcyclist for governor maybe; Schwarzy does not qualify. But that's another topic entirely... | ||
| Teeps |
Nuerburgringer Posted on Tuesday, January 16, 2007 - Matters will not improve, unless we elect an avid motorcyclist for governor maybe; Schwarzy does not qualify. But that's another topic entirely... We won't get fooled again! | ||
| Nuerburgringer |
--My insurance agent just got a "Street Legal" Husky, except it came with the wrong EPA sticker from the factory, even though it is a California bike. He is having a hell of a time sorting it all out.-- I'm curious about that. Beginning in 2006, all of the enduro and supermoto Husqvarnas have 50-state stickers, and are fully street-legal in CA right off the showroom floor. If his bike is a prior year model, it was unfortunately never "factory" street-legal here in CA. http://www.husqvarnausa.com/ My Husky supermoto is a 2006, purchased in CA, and registered here just like any other street-legal vehicle in CA. Nobody ever looked at the sticker, and nobody ever does. Maybe he bought a gray plated bike. To get that gray plate, off-highway motorcycles must now have an emission label affixed to the vehicle indicating certification by the manufacturer for on-highway use. (in addition to the restictions mentioned elsewhere in this thread.) That's the catch-22; manufacturers don't get their dirt models certified for on-highway, but rather only for off-highway. 2006/7 Huskies are the exception, and a coupla 2007 KTMs. Unfortunately, if its a pre-2006 model, sounds like his VIN has already been flagged, which means he'll never get it registered for street in CA anymore. But if its a 2006 or 2007 Husqvarna, and some DMV jerk is being a stickler over the label, then all he needs to do is go order a label from the local Husky dealer. It really is that simple. I certainly hope that's the case. | ||
| Krassh |
Time to start buying cheap stock take offs here in Cali. you will sitting on a gold mine when these guys have to buy them back to get their machines to pass inspection. |
