Exhausts - Most stupid law ever

[DarkCaporaL]

So I went to talk with the city attorney yesterday about exhausts and how they apply the regulations here in Quebec, and it's the dumbest **** ever.

The Regulation respecting safety standards for road vehicles states:

91. The exhaust system shall include the following components: manifolds, pipes, muffler, brackets and fasteners.

Those components shall be securely mounted to their anchorages and no leakage of exhaust gases shall be detected through joints, cracks or holes other than those originally provided by the manufacturer of the exhaust system to evacuate condensation.

Any repair on any of the components shall be such as to preserve the original characteristics.

So what this last line means, unless you have an almost stock exhaust, they can nail you on this regulation. Your exhaust is not the same size? You dont have the same configuration then the stock one? Resonator vs stock square box.....this regulation isn't even about sound levels. You can have the most quiet exhaust ever, if it's not like the stock one, ticket!

They use stock exhaust comparison sheets, and they have an "expert" doing research on every single car.

This regulation is so broad it's not even funny. And they apply it broadly..

Any piss off cop can stop you and give you a ticket on this. And when I was there I heard the cops and prosecutors talking about RHD's (with the new 180 day ban), and how it was this major problem and blah blah. This is a friggin conspiracy lol.

My rant.

[Daryl @ RightDrive]

It's a shame in Canada an officer can decide what he deems to be "illegal" on his own.
In other countries such as Japan there are very clear laws as to what is legal and what is not. Canada really has to start specifying what is not acceptable.
My friend in Toronto went to court 9 times for "improper muffler" (everytime having to take time off work) and every single ticket was thrown out by the judge. Now really, what is the point, everyone is wasting everyone elses time.

[FunnyGas]

every law is subject to interpretation. not every word has static meaning. implied meaning does not work, they have to elaborate...
ok.. look at it. carefully.
what do we see..
"repair"
hrmm..

re·pair 1 (r-pār)
v. re·paired, re·pair·ing, re·pairs
v.tr.
1. To restore to sound condition after damage or injury; fix: repaired the broken watch.
2. To set right; remedy: repair an oversight.
3. To make up for or compensate for (a loss or wrong, for example).

so if the stock exhaust in perfectly good condition was replaced, its not a repair. there was nothing broken to fix.
furthermore what you posted does not list any exhaust size restrictions. and being car from out of country they would not have the specifications on our stock exhaust.
i agree with daryl, they have to start saying what is and isnt wrong. having a law that basically says "something might be illegal, we'll decide when need be" is horseshit.
i may be wrong, but thats the way i see it.

[DarkCaporaL]

every law is subject to interpretation. not every word has static meaning. implied meaning does not work, they have to elaborate...
ok.. look at it. carefully.
what do we see..
"repair"
hrmm..


so if the stock exhaust in perfectly good condition was replaced, its not a repair. there was nothing broken to fix.

I couldn't agree with you more. I just said that's how the jurisprudence applies it at the moment.

Trust me, I work in International Law, and jurisprudence ALWAYS goes as broad as they can go. A judge would probably say something in the lines of: "I do not believe repair in this regulation was intended in the specific sense, but in a more general manner of replacing or changing parts of the system"....blah blah....you get the point.

furthermore what you posted does not list any exhaust size restrictions. and being car from out of country they would not have the specifications on our stock exhaust.

Quick open sourcing on the internet can find this information. And that's what their so called "expert" does all day. He prepares prosecution cases by finding stock exhaust specifications.

[DarkCaporaL]

Now really, what is the point, everyone is wasting everyone elses time.

Yeah I always feel the urge to tell them something in the lines of: "Don't you have murderer's and rapists to catch?".

But then I just know that would turn out bad for me. lol

[cobrAA]

But end of story, did you win your ticket or not??

Did you know, in Quebec, there's a guy who own or used to own a STOCK BNR32 exhaust that show that it's 100% free flow-straight pipe?

[collector240sx]

I thought that we lived in a English law system.

There for, isn't up to them to show how your exhaust would be illegal
and not for us to prove otherwise. Innocent until proven guilty. How
would they actually go and prove that your car has a illegal exhaust
anyway.

Wouldn't a nismo exhaust still be a stock exhaust system.
Just use that one for comparison.

And that must be the worst written law I have ever seen. lol
From the way it's written, It would mean that any modification
to make your car more ecofriendly would also be illegal. lol

[m_melen]

hmm, no holes or leaks allowed...ruh roh! lol.

[m_melen]

ya know, it says any REPAIRS must be to stock specs, what if you're not repairing, but swapping?

[DarkCaporaL]

But end of story, did you win your ticket or not??

I just said **** that **** and I paid the 150$. I made up my mind that I was going to change my exhaust anyways. (I admit it's too damn loud)

Funny thing is when talking with the city attorney, I would of won my case on the noise level and straight through part, but not the dual tip. Yes my car has an ugly dual tip! But it came that way. And the fact that it's a dual tip, it doesn't keep the same "caracteristics" has the stock one. BS if you ask me.

Anyways, if I would of lost in court, it would of cost me 150$ + 85 (court fees) + 85$ (officer testimony) + ~100$ ("expert" witness testimony, which can vary depending on the number of cases) = too damn much for a stupid exhaust.

So that's why I decided to change my plea, and just pay the damn 150$ instead of like 500$.

Did you know, in Quebec, there's a guy who own or used to own a STOCK BNR32 exhaust that show that it's 100% free flow-straight pipe?

It was probably not stock. I've seen the stock exhaust, and it has a square box and not a resonator. Anyways unless they made another type of exhaust but I doubt it.

Wouldn't a nismo exhaust still be a stock exhaust system.
Just use that one for comparison.

Yeah that's what I had lined up. But my dual tip screwed me over.

[DarkCaporaL]

ya know, it says any REPAIRS must be to stock specs, what if you're not repairing, but swapping?

^^ go read my 2nd response :P.

[cobrAA]

This one my friend

[DarkCaporaL]

This one my friend

Yeah that's the stock one. But I HIGHLY doubt it's straight through just by looking at it. Unless you can show me a picture of the internals of both the end muffler and the square box, in my mind it's not straight through.

[cobrAA]

I could ask the owner.. give me some times!

Not sure if he still have it..

[DarkCaporaL]

I could ask the owner.. give me some times!

Not sure if he still have it..

That was the picture of archaeic_bloke's old exhaust, and he sold it. :-P