Does this make any sense to you?

My friend has a few older Honda CT70 motorcycles from the early 1970's. They certainly are not stylish, but are extremely efficient on fuel, averaging just over 80 miles to the gallon!





He told me that these motorcycles were made in China and designed for the rural population there as a cheap means to get around..However, he said that they were not permitted into the USA per the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency)! These cycles do not use or burn leaded fuel, can reach speeds of up to 60 miles per hour, and can carry two people or average weight up a 45 degree incline....Sounds like these cycles could be one small answer to this gas crisis we are having?





The thing I don't understand is why the hell would the EPA decide to not allow these motorcycles into the country? How could their emissions result in anything more than what we are already putting out now? It seems to me that the oil company reps may have strong-armed the EPA on this one, what do you think?
Does this make any sense to you?
They never have been street legal and should not be. To start with every kid in the country would be out on the streets with them. They are to low to be seen. They do not handle well on the paved streets. I have had one and I think your performance claims are a Little high.
Does this make any sense to you?
If the exhaust from these bikes is harmful to the eco system, what good is it to save on gas?
Reply:I totally understand what you are saying. I am not well versed enough in EPA regulations to say why that particular bike is not compliant, but there are many bikes and scooters out there now that get 70 - 80 MPG and are legal for road use. I would love to see more people go this route. The more bikes there are on the road, the less cars there are and the safer it is for the rest of us on bikes.
Reply:hey, when the govt wants to keep asian import crap made for $0.06 per hour labor costs out, then i'm all for it!
Reply:If they are CT70s from the 70s they are street legal.(they met all requirements when manufactured and therefore are Grandfathered in.) If they are Chinese copies produced later they do not meet current DOT (not EPA) standards, and therefore not street legal. (some states like SD will allow them, but they also allow ATVs on hiway)





And top speed is more like 40 not 60.
Reply:EPA is a bunch of horse dung fueled by the corp world to screw us even more. I had some older vehicles that would get more Miles per gallon then there equals of today. Maybe{big??? MAYBE} the vehicle of today has a cleaner exhaust but if it's burning more fuel how does that help sh**? People have away of screwing with sh** and adding a line of bull to make it look good.





As far as the bike you are speaking of goes I don't believe it would be all that safe compared to other choices out there.
Reply:No, it doesn't make any sense to me. Here's why:





1) The EPA never blocked these bikes from being imported into the United States. There were tons of them from 1969-1981 under their original configuration and re-issued in 1981 under a different VIN sequence and sold until 1994.





2) The 1981-1994 models have engines that were produced by a supplier for Honda, and these may have been produced in China. I would guess Lifan since most of their engines are copies of Honda's, and Honda parts can often be substituted on Lifan engines.





3) The EPA does not block motorcycles from entry into this country, they only limit them to off-road use if they do not meet emissions standards. Hence the term "street legal".





4) The earlier models were designed to run on leaded gas, and if you're running one on unleaded then you're wearing out the valve seats which need the lead as a lubricant.





5) The published stats on this bike are: 6hp at 9000 rpm, mileage is 85 km/liter, and the climbing ability is 18 degrees. Top speed is 75 km/hr. I agree with the other answers that your buddy might not be right on his statistics.





6) These bikes featured a fixed bore carb, which is the least fuel efficient way to operate an engine. Fixed bore carbs will obtain a higher reading of CO, NOX and hydrocarbons than a CV or other variable venturi carb, and will be ten times higher than the readings on modern fuel injected bikes. When the EPA is reviewing the emissions of an engine, the designation of "off-road use only" is based on the ratio of harmful emissions to the engine size. This 72cc bike probably has worse emissions than the new 125cc 4-stroke dirt bikes, although I've never hooked one up to my EGA to find out for sure.





7) Oil companies strong-arm the EPA to limit this bike? No, definitely not.





8) Certainly not stylish? I beg to differ! No downtube on the frame, no engine cradle underneath, just a motor suspended from an upper rail only frame which was also the gas tank! Sounds to me like Honda was 35 years ahead of companies like Buell...
Reply:I agree with Kato on this one. There are much better bikes that get the same miliage and pass epa standards and not built with slave labor.
Reply:I'm with you Snoop, plus that $0.06 an hour labor rate is for 8 year olds with 2 yrs. on the job training. You don't get paid for your training years, Comrade. By order of the Chairman.