Bill would allow 'switchable exhausts' on boats

[OCDACTIVE]

http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100924/GJNEWS02/709249932/0/CITNEWSHot

[Pineedles]

Sounds like a great idea. I don't know how anyone could argue with a bill that only makes a boat quieter.

[ishoot308]

This is a great idea especially when coming in and out of port / marina at night or early in the morning or when docking.

Dan

[XCR-700]

WOW, finally a voice of reason,,,

Long over due and much appreciated!!!

[ApS]

What Price, "Safety", SBONH? :rolleye2:

I don't know how anyone could argue with a bill that only makes a boat quieter.
It doesn't. :mad:

This is another "Trojan Horse" for naïve New Hampshire Reps and Senators—just like the bill that made "Jet-Ski" into "Boat". :rolleye1:

[RI Swamp Yankee]

From the Citizen story:
Verdonck explained that there are two types of exhaust systems: a through-hull and an above-hull system. Through-hull systems push the engine exhaust out through the propeller, which does not create much noise. Verdonck said many of the high-performance boats require the above-hull exhaust systems because of the increased pressure created by such boats. Because the above-hull systems are exposed out of the water, the sound must be controlled by a muffler.

What about exhaust systems that are below waterline but not through the propeller? Does Verdonck know there are more than two?

[Hezman]

Great pro-active bill to enhance the lake experience for all.......and finally a boating bill submission based on reasonable rationale!

[Woodsy]

RISY....

I am guessing the reporter knows very little about boats and paraphrased the actual quote. But then again some people take everything they read as fact regardless of the source!

There are 2 popular modern marine sterndrive exhaust systems used by most boat builders, both systems use water to cool and somewhat muffle the exhaust. The most popular system on runabouts and small cruisers (300HP and under) exit below the waterline through the sterndrive using the slight negative pressure created by the propeller to help evacuate the exhaust. This is far & away the quietest system. The exhaust system does not require any mufflers and is rarely if ever above the water. However it is limited to smaller marine engines.

On larger HP boats, (300 and up) most boat manufacturers offer a thru hull system that allows the exhaust to exit through the transom or side of the boat and into the air. This system usually has the rumble of an older corvette. By NH law, this type of system requires mufflers. The noise level of any motorized vessel must not exceed these limits...

Stationary test limit:
90 decibels for engines manufactured prior to January 1, 1991
88 decibels for engines manufactured on or after January 1, 1991

Moving test limit as measured on the “A” scale and from a distance of 50 feet:
84 decibels for engines manufactured prior to January 1, 1991
82 decibels for engines manufactured on or after January 1, 1991

Coincedentally, the NH law is pretty much in line with the NMMA (National Marine Manufacturers Association) standards for noise regulation. So most boats built in the last 20 years or so have conformed to the NMMA standards... even as those standards have tightened up over the years.

http://www.nmma.org/lib/docs/nmma/gr/environmental/Noise_Emissions_NPS.doc


The switchable exhaust system, also called "Captain's Call" or "Quick & Quiet" is the best of both worlds! It allows the boat owner to switch between thru hull or thru the propeller.... thus quieting the boat when idling around the docks, or late night early morning cruises.

The proposed law REQUIRES THE BOAT TO CONFORM TO THE NOISE REGULATIONS IN THE OPEN (LOUD) OR CLOSED (QUIET) POSITION.... so if a boat legally passes the noise test to begin with, how does the switchable exhaust cause any harm??

If I can be quieter around the docks, or enjoy early morning cruises quietly... I am all for it! I do not understand why anyone would not be!


Woodsy

[Little Bear]

What Price, "Safety", SBONH? :rolleye2:


It doesn't. :mad:

This is another "Trojan Horse" for naïve New Hampshire Reps and Senators—just like the bill that made "Jet-Ski" into "Boat". :rolleye1:

Just like the Trojan Horse speed limit bill that wasn't about speed at all, but rather was about scrubbing the lake of a certain kind of boat. But that's ok, right, since it's your agenda.

:rolleye2::coolsm::(:rolleye1::laugh::eek::emb::ya wn::)

[RI Swamp Yankee]

.... I am guessing the reporter knows very little about boats and paraphrased the actual quote. ....I was thinking the same about the reporter who may not have understood all that Scott Verdonck said.

When I wrote that I was thinking about a little inboard I used to have many years ago. It had a Grey Marine 4 cylinder engine that pumped the cooling water through the engine and out the exhaust which was below the waterline. It wasn't a nice as those old Chris-Craft boats I used to admire at Alton Bay that had a similar exhaust setup. I don't think the reporter would even remember those boats.

[jrc]

Can someone please tell me any reason this law would be a bad idea?

It does not allow any louder boats than are allowed today, and it allows those boats to be quieter when they are running slowly. What am I missing?

I understood the speed limit proponents, even if I heartily disagreed with them. Same with rafting laws and no wake zones, I understand why some people want them.

Why would anyone be against this law? Am I missing a "slippery slope" argument? Is it "not far enough".

I'm for any law that makes the lake quieter without restricting anyone rights.

[gtagrip]

Can someone please tell me any reason this law would be a bad idea?

It does not allow any louder boats than are allowed today, and it allows those boats to be quieter when they are running slowly. What am I missing?

I understood the speed limit proponents, even if I heartily disagreed with them. Same with rafting laws and no wake zones, I understand why some people want them.

Why would anyone be against this law? Am I missing a "slippery slope" argument? Is it "not far enough".

I'm for any law that makes the lake quieter without restricting anyone rights.

Let's see what SOTD has to say about this. He seems to be the authority on this issue! :emb::rolleye2:

[tc_mike]

Can someone please tell me any reason this law would be a bad idea?
I believe that some opponents of this bill would argue that a legal switchable exhaust system makes it easier for boaters to violate the noise regulations and get away with it. I can think of no other reason to oppose this bill.

[jrc]

Got it, so some people are afraid that boats that are too loud, will not be noticed as too loud because everytime anyone is nearby they will be switched to quiet mode. So the only time they will be too loud is when no one can hear them.

That reminds me of this quote:

the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.

[Pineedles]

This issue is so non-contraversial that I can't understand why it is in the debating area? There has been no opposing information as to why this is a bad bill, only opposition from a few folks with nothing to back up why they think it is a bad bill. What is going on? Has the SL debate made the supporters of the Speed Limit just blindly oppose anything from the other side? OMG, are you really just trolls, and just like to argue?:(

[Woodsy]

Got it, so some people are afraid that boats that are too loud, will not be noticed as too loud because everytime anyone is nearby they will be switched to quiet mode. So the only time they will be too loud is when no one can hear them.

That reminds me of this quote:

the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.

If the boat has to be able to pass the noise test in open or closed mode I kind of think this is a mute point. As it stands right now, if a MP officer "thinks" your boat might be too loud he can effect a stop and issue a citation requiring you to take the noise test.... the proposed law does not change this.


Woodsy

[ApS]

Thinking about this some more: :rolleye1:

This bill may fool the rank-and-file, but it won't trick Director Barrett. :look:

[chipj29]

Thinking about this some more: :rolleye1:

This bill may fool the rank-and-file, but it won't trick Director Barrett. :look:

And who is trying to trick Director Barrett? What exactly is the "trick?

[ApS]

And who is trying to trick Director Barrett? What exactly is the "trick?
You'll have to ask Director Barrett—after he receives my handwritten advisory—which I haven't finished yet.

I'll be leaving out the part where the chief instigator is opposed to seatbelt use—mandatory or otherwise—and may have attracted the attention of many New Hampshire voters by the enjoyment of a lighted cigar in Lakes Region restaurants. :rolleye2:

[jmen24]

Waiting almost two weeks to post a reply. It almost seems like you thrive on having the last word. Well Bob, I am going to take another one from you. My posts almost make as much sense as your posts do.

[ApS]

"Safe Boaters" may need to study their "studied" proposal—a lot!

Recently, a two-engined 38-foot Fountain sank due to its "through-hull" exhaust. :eek2:

The URL below leads to the actual story and CG video, but the December issue of Soundings presently has its findings only in print.

By later request of the owner, the Fountain 38 was recovered from the bottom and examined. The victims had seen water pumped into the bilge through one engine—eventually stalling both engines—and causing the boat to sink! :eek:

The problem was the exhaust! :eek2: :eek:

Twenty hours is a long time to tread water a ½-mile off shore before rescue—they should have had a PED! :cool:

http://www.boattest.com/Resources/view_news.aspx?NewsID=4286

[chipj29]

"Safe Boaters" may need to study their "studied" proposal—a lot!

Recently, a two-engined 38-foot Fountain sank due to its "through-hull" exhaust. :eek2:

The URL below leads to the actual story and CG video, but the December issue of Soundings presently has its findings only in print.

By later request of the owner, the Fountain 38 was recovered from the bottom and examined. The victims had seen water pumped into the bilge through one engine—eventually stalling both engines—and causing the boat to sink! :eek:

The problem was the exhaust! :eek2: :eek:

Twenty hours is a long time to tread water a ½-mile off shore before rescue—they should have had a PED! :cool:

http://www.boattest.com/Resources/view_news.aspx?NewsID=4286

Maybe during your next google search you should find an article for a sail boat that sank due to running aground. It would be just as relevant.

[VtSteve]

I've heard of boats taking on water for a variety of reasons. Some of the air vents on certain models allow water to be come in after stopping, sometimes the exhaust bellows is aged, and that will sink the boat as well. I didn't see where they found the cause, my guess would be the bellows, that's a lot of water coming in quickly.

Many boats have thru-hull exhausts, from old Chris Crafts to some bowriders and cruisers. Whether a boat has switchable exhaust or not has no bearing on the above reference.

The boat in question was an express cruiser, and they were fishing. Due to this fact, I wondered whether they had anchored from the stern.. Not a wise thing to do in any boat. But All 7 people were wearing PFD's, probably a good thing.

[Wolfeboro_Baja]

The problem was the exhaust! :eek2: :eek:Do you have the Soundings magazine in question? If so, would you please provide the text where it explains why the boat sank? My six-yr-old Baja has thru-hull exhausts and while I've not had a problem with them yet, I'd like to know if there's something I should be giving some extra attention to.

Thank you.

[hazelnut]

Good post Steve. APS just showed his extreme lack of knowledge when it comes to Thru-Hull exhaust. Many boats come from the factory with thru-hull and have to be "Monkeyed" with to comply with the antiquated, outdated NH law.

APS needs to do some relevant google searching to educate himself on what switchable exhaust is. Actually come to think of it if the boat in question HAD switchable exhaust it quite possibly could have saved the boat from sinking as the captain could have switched it to thru-transom and the water would have stopped coming in through the pipes.

So actually thanks APS for raising the issue and helping to illustrate yet another benefit to switchable exhaust. :D

[VtSteve]

I still think that they were anchored from the stern and fishing, a no no in those conditions offshore.

Thanks for the link APS, that was very helpful.

[NoBozo]

Water backing in through a through hull exhaust will NOT sink the boat. It will only STOP the engine. ("Look up Reversion"). A failed bellows will NOT sink the boat. After a failed bellows..the water has to get through the gimbal bearing...only a trickle. :D Just sayin....NB

[ApS]

you should find an article for a sail boat that sank due to running aground. It would be just as relevant.
Some interest has gathered. :rolleye1:

I still think that they were anchored from the stern and fishing, a no no in those conditions offshore.
1) Anchoring from the stern is a safety issue not yet addressed by SBONH-NHRBA: It cost the lives of NFL football players, who shed their PFDs (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,505172,00.html) to reach shore or rescue. This lack of "Common Sense" was reported widely, but only because of the NFL connection.

SBONH-NHRBA can't be blamed for being ignorant of it. :cool:

2) The family was proceeding forward according to Soundings' December issue: "Insufficient exhaust baffles" was the reason given for the 38' Fountain's disasterous capsize and near-tragedy just ½-mile from shore.

3) Including the two above articles, Soundings reports huge numbers of safety issues and is available at newstands such as "Black's Paper Store" in Wolfeboro.

So actually thanks APS for raising the issue and helping to illustrate yet another benefit to switchable exhaust. :D
Me? :eek2:

One individual is "trumping" an entire organization "devoted to safety on Lake Winnipesaukee"? :eek:

:laugh:

Actually, I expect SBONH-NHRBA to be seen eventually for the noisy, alcohol-fueled "speed-freaks" that they are: I just like to contribute where I can. :)

https://mail.google.com/mail/?attid=0.6&disp=emb&view=att&th=125a46a035207f77

[ITD]

I don't like loud boats and think boats should be as quiet as possible at all times, I hope this bill fails.

[classic22]

ITD, Just to be clear on the intent of this bill....It would take a boat that is IN COMPLIANCE with the current State of NH laws regarding decibel levels of boat exhaust, and give the captain of the vessel the opportunity to make his boat quieter. I think most logical people would think that this option would be welcomed in NH, just like it is everywhere else in the country.

[VtSteve]

I don't like loud boats and think boats should be as quiet as possible at all times, I hope this bill fails.

ITD, as Classic said, I don't think you understand the bill, nor the exhaust. APS has a way of making one's eyes cross and brain twist in such a way, well, in a way that makes one very confused.

We'll have a real grown up discussion of this somewhere I guess. I don't really like loud boats either, so that's not my agenda.

[ITD]

ITD, Just to be clear on the intent of this bill....It would take a boat that is IN COMPLIANCE with the current State of NH laws regarding decibel levels of boat exhaust, and give the captain of the vessel the opportunity to make his boat quieter. I think most logical people would think that this option would be welcomed in NH, just like it is everywhere else in the country.

Thanks Classic, I get that and understand that the bill doesn't make noise above the present limit legal. But the law can also and most likely will be used to make quiet boats louder, and I think that sucks. Too much noise already, and trust me, I'm not a kayak paddling, granola crunching environmentalist here, I just hate unnecessary noise. My opinion....

[Dave R]

The family was proceeding forward according to Soundings' December issue: "Insufficient exhaust baffles" was the reason given for the 38' Fountain's disasterous capsize and near-tragedy just ½-mile from shore.


I'm trying to think of a way a properly operating exhaust system could cause a boat to capsize. I cannot fathom why it would make a boat take on water. My boat's exhaust is wide open and completely submerged when not on plane, yet my boat does not sink becuase the exhaust has to travel upwards, above the waterline before turning down to exit out of my stern drive. I would think that the root cause was a design flaw or poorly executed modification that affected the height of the elbows on the exhaust system, not the location of the outlets or the lack of baffles within.

[classic22]

Thanks Classic, I get that and understand that the bill doesn't make noise above the present limit legal. But the law can also and most likely will be used to make quiet boats louder, and I think that sucks. Too much noise already, and trust me, I'm not a kayak paddling, granola crunching environmentalist here, I just hate unnecessary noise. My opinion....

ITD, while I appreciate your concerns, the cost of modifyng a quiet boat into a "switchable exhaust" would most likely be prohibitive with the cost to modify in the 3k range. Most of the boats you hear on the lake today that might be considered by some as offensive, actually are legal and have mufflers. Most boaters today that want some "sound" to their boat would just opt for above water line exhaust with mufflers, and be perfectly happy and legal. Alot of boats produced by manufactures today with above water line exhaust build them with a switch to quiet them even further. It seems counter intuitive that the same boat has to be modified today to remove the switch to be able to legally operate in NH waters, regardless if it is legal on the "loud" setting. This law also drives away tourists, who may choose to take their boating dollars somewhere else, because they would have to modify their boat today to be compliant with law in NH and no where else.This new proposed legislation makes sense for residents of NH and tourists alike.

[ApS]

I'm trying to think of a way a properly operating exhaust system could cause a boat to capsize. I cannot fathom why it would make a boat take on water. My boat's exhaust is wide open and completely submerged when not on plane, yet my boat does not sink becuase the exhaust has to travel upwards, above the waterline before turning down to exit out of my stern drive. I would think that the root cause was a design flaw or poorly executed modification that affected the height of the elbows on the exhaust system, not the location of the outlets or the lack of baffles within.
The article (and the investigation) consists of two 12" x 16" pages with too many paragraphs to type out, but I found a picture! :)

http://www.soundingsonline.com/images/stories/monthly/12_10/N18_FOUNTAIN.jpg

You can tell it's a Fountain "by the nose". :D

(I read that at www.winnipesaukee.com after a Fountain sank below Lake Winnipesaukee waters). :eek2:

With their very heavy iron engines, Fountains and most other GFBLs float (and idle) "stern-down"—and very visibly. :confused: Intuition :cool: would tell us they're already prone to capsize. :(

Since twin 496 MerCruiser engines are heavy—and the 38' boat had so many of its crew aft :eek: I suspect that even "factory-designed" exhausts would be overwhelmed when displaced below the waterline.

The article doesn't address such a "loading-fault" by the operator, but the operator paid to have the boat raised from the bottom, and has likely omitted any data that could later prove incriminating.

(This is an insured six-year-old boat). :eek2:

1) So what happens when there are two channels through which to sink a boat in this manner? :eek2:

2) As hazelnut has put-forward, wouldn't real safety for New Hampshire boaters mandate that all boats have "switchable exhausts" installed—so a Captain can save his boat and crew from a capsize and sinking? :confused:

[Wolfeboro_Baja]

HB-441 passed the House and Senate and reportedly has been signed into law by Gov. Lynch today!! :)

[chipj29]

Thinking about this some more: :rolleye1:

This bill may fool the rank-and-file, but it won't trick Director Barrett. :look:

You'll have to ask Director Barrett—after he receives my handwritten advisory—which I haven't finished yet.

I'll be leaving out the part where the chief instigator is opposed to seatbelt use—mandatory or otherwise—and may have attracted the attention of many New Hampshire voters by the enjoyment of a lighted cigar in Lakes Region restaurants. :rolleye2:

Not sure if it "tricked" anyone, but it passed. Sorry. :(

Smoke 'em if you got 'em! :D

[jarhead0341]

I guess the hand written advisory wasn't finished in time........ glad to see there is still some common sense out there

[RTTOOL]

i guess the hand written advisory wasn't finished in time........ Glad to see there is still some common sense out there

now lets work on the other things :)

[ApS]

I guess the hand written advisory wasn't finished in time........


I elected to write the Governor instead, and referred to this bill as the Trojan Horse it is. :mad:

Mentioned, was that this bill will bring every boater with "Switchable Exhaust" out in the open, and "invite" visitors—with bad boating reputations—from neighboring states . :(

There was no reply for weeks and weeks. :confused: Somebody in his office later replied, "The bill has been signed". :eek:

These past few days, "Switchable Exhausts" have been switched on-and-off-and-on-again—rattling windows and dishes. :mad:

Credit SBONH with sneaking this through to completion: SBONH definitely "got back" at WinnFABS' family boaters. :(

"Quiet and Quieter" is a joke—a joke at the expense of peaceable family boaters. Peaceable boaters, of whom New Hampshire law mandates—to always carry on board—a whistle). :eek2:

[ishoot308]

I elected to write the Governor instead, and referred to this bill as the Trojan Horse it is. :mad:

Mentioned, was that this bill will bring every boater with "Switchable Exhaust" out in the open, and "invite" visitors—with bad boating reputations—from neighboring states . :(

There was no reply for weeks and weeks. :confused: Somebody in his office later replied, "The bill has been signed". :eek:

These past few days, "Switchable Exhausts" have been switched on-and-off-and-on-again—rattling windows and dishes. :mad:

Credit SBONH with sneaking this through to completion: SBONH definitely "got back" at WinnFABS' family boaters. :(

"Quiet and Quieter" is a joke—a joke at the expense of peaceable family boaters. Peaceable boaters, of whom New Hampshire law mandates—to always carry on board—a whistle). :eek2:\

You have no clue what you are talking about as switchable exhausts can only do one thing...make a boat quieter. They can only be used when docking or coming into or out of port. They cannot, repeat CANNOT be switched at any speed above headway speed without engine damage. They cannot be turned on and off at cruising speed as you are trying to allude to. Your claims are completely false and without merit.

I have already seen the benefits of this exhaust while sitting at the Glendale Town docks last weekend. Boats which were normally legally loud while warming up were able to switch to quiet mode. There was a huge difference in sound levels. All docks, coves and no wake areas on Winnipesaukee have already started to see the benefit of this bill and will continue as more and more "Captains Call" exhaust are installed.

I applaud SBONH for getting this bill passed!!

Dan

[NHBUOY]

...IS308...not so sure about not being able to use the switchable exhausts on "quiet mode" at ONLY headway speed...that is simply not true...what makes you think that.?..just curious...re:aps...he is what he isn't...:D...

[NoBozo]

I believe it is recommended by the their manufacturers, that switchable exhaust NOT be used at engine speeds over 2000 RPM. :look: NB

[NHBUOY]

...I'm gonna check on that...so I have my FACTS right...be right back...

[NHBUOY]

...here's the FACTS on switchables...you "shouldn't" flip the switch if your RPM's are higher than 2000 RPM...there is NO REASON that you cannot use the quiet mode at any RPM...that is the reason for the switchables...to quiet the boat down where noise is a concern...(I checked with Captain's Call & Silent Choice on this although I "knew" the right answer)...:cool:...

[ishoot308]

...IS308...not so sure about not being able to use the switchable exhausts on "quiet mode" at ONLY headway speed...that is simply not true...what makes you think that.?..just curious...re:aps...he is what he isn't...:D...

They are recommended for low RPM use only. It is simply untrue for anyone to think you can simply switch these at wide open or even half throttle. Corsa recommneds nothing over 3000 RPM's.

In the loud mode your boat still has to be at the required legal decibel level so how does a below water noise baffling system make your boat louder??...

Here is a good explanation about HB 441 from a local boating enthusiast...

“I hope I can explain what these systems do in very plain terms for you to better understand the merits of this bill.

Currently there are two types of exhaust:

Thru-Hub - or below the water line (very quiet)

Thru-Hull - or above the water line (where exhaust can be heard)

There are many different style boats with both types of exhaust systems. Some of which have to have above water, or thru-hull, systems or else it could cause damage to the engine.

Currently there are restrictions in place on the decibel limits or "noise limitations" as to the maximum decibel these boats can emit.

In no way does HB 441 look to adjust these noise limits.

To help make boats quieter, that have this above water exhaust, there are systems that can be purchased or even come standard with boats that quiet the exhaust at low RPM's or speeds. These systems are referred to as "switchable exhaust systems".

This allows the boat owner to, in essence, turn down the noise when going at slow or idle speeds. This benefits everyone on the shoreline and even those on other boats when in a congested environment.

Currently there is a law that bans these systems from NH. They were originally banned because it was thought that one could have a boat that exceeded the noise statutes and when they saw a Marine Patrol unit, they could simply turn the exhaust off at higher speeds causing enforcement issues. This is completely untrue. In doing so, you could potentially cause catashropic failure to the unit and even the boats engine.

In no way does this bill make a boat that is currently "illegal" under the current RSA,. legal It simply allows to make a boat (that is already legal) quieter which in turn improves the enjoyment of everyone around and on the shoreline.

This bill has been written in conjunction with the Dept. of Safety to make sure there are no enforcement problems and has overwhelming support out of the House.”




Hope this helps!

Dan

[NHBUOY]

...did not check Corsa, but that sounds wrong...all you're really doing is diverting the exhaust through the stock Y-tube out the lower-unit...switching at high RPM's is a NO-NO tho...

[ishoot308]

...did not check Corsa, but that sounds wrong...all you're really doing is diverting the exhaust through the stock Y-tube out the lower-unit...switching at high RPM's is a NO-NO tho...

NHBUOY;

Here is Corsa's

I think we are saying the same thing...

My point being A.P.S. is stating that he is hearing all these boats switching from quiet to silent while underway and that is simply is not true and can't happen! These exhausts are only being used when at docks or coming in and out of port or in coves or no wake areas that is the ONLY time they are beneficial.

Dan

[Woodsy]

Using any type of switchable exhaust at an engine RPM higher than what the mfr recommends may cause the internal flapper to break or an excessive water amount too close to the exhaust port... this can potentially cause reversion! Reversion (water being ingested into the engine via the exhaust valve due to camhaft profile) usually equals catastrophic engine failure....

Woodsy

[NHBUOY]

...ya...I get ya IS308...no harm, no foul...Hi BH..lol..you cowboy..:laugh:...

[BroadHopper]

Glad to see everyone is checking the websites to prove aps is blowing smoke! I challenge him earlier for a lively race on the road course at Loudon. So far he talks Beemers in FL. From the look of reviews in the car enthisiast magazines, I'm inviting my son in law and his Audi all road for breakfast!

[ApS]

In no way does this bill make a boat that is currently "illegal" under the current RSA,. legal It simply allows to make a boat (that is already legal) quieter which in turn improves the enjoyment of everyone around and on the shoreline.
1) Maybe those were the intentions of SBONH—made for public consumption...but In Reality—I think not!

2) You're not here 24/7.

you "shouldn't" flip the switch if your RPM's are higher than 2000 RPM.
...and...

Using any type of switchable exhaust at an engine RPM higher...
...and...
It is simply untrue for anyone to think you can simply switch these at wide open...throttle
...and...

...switching at high RPM's is a NO-NO tho...
...and...

1) Once again, a collection of false premises is trying to support "the impossible". (See 2 ).

2) I never stated "switching" occurred at high RPMs. :rolleye1:

3) Saturday, I had an independent witness as a guest—an engineer—who witnessed the same impossible thing. :rolleye2:

[VitaBene]

2) You're not here 24/7.[/B][/FONT]




Neither are you

[Shreddy]

1) Maybe those were the intentions of SBONH—made for public consumption...but In Reality—I think not!

2) You're not here 24/7.


...and...


...and...

...and...


...and...

1) Once again, a collection of false premises is trying to support "the impossible". (See 2 ).

2) I never stated "switching" occurred at high RPMs. :rolleye1:

3) Saturday, I had an independent witness as a guest—an engineer—who witnessed the same impossible thing. :rolleye2:

Last week, my independent brain surgeon friend who plays for the Red Sox on his time off witnessed me shoot an 80 at Ridgewood. For reference, an 80 for me is pretty darn close to impossible.

[ishoot308]

"You're not here 24/7."

Actually during the months of July and August I am and very soon I will be here 24/7 ! Until then three days a week will have to suffice. :emb:

Dan

[ApS]

Neither are you
'Not too many boats on the Lake—when it's frozen. :D

[VitaBene]

'Not too many boats on the Lake—when it's frozen. :D

To quote your signature on another forum: Location: Wolfeboro (½-year) Florida (the rest). Last time I checked Ice in didn't last 6 months, if you want to play semantics.

[ApS]

So far he talks Beemers in FL.
Beemers are the motorcycles: Bimmers are the automobiles.:cool:

now lets work on the other things
Like getting those "Grown-Ups" who already had Switchable Exhaust to stop playing with their exhaust racket when people are in their residences?

When you can't fix stupid—maybe educate them? :rolleye1:

To quote your signature on another forum: Location: Wolfeboro (½-year) Florida (the rest). Last time I checked Ice in didn't last 6 months, if you want to play semantics.
Just like I wouldn't say that BP will never have a NWZ, I wouldn't say that the lake never had ice for 6 months straight. :coolsm:

There are times when I'm the only person taking pictures in Winnipesaukee's ice from an outboard boat...:look:

—AND—

...the only boat in Lake Winnipesaukee.

:)

[Coastal Laker]

I have a 26' Chaparral cuddy; it's not an obnoxious boat. When switched to "loud," for lack of a better term, it doesn't sound obnoxious or even remotely close to annoying. It has a nice rumble to it. I'm thrilled that I can now switch to quiet when coming into a marina at night or other area where people would appreciate me switching to "quiet" and not get in trouble for trying to be considerate.

I've actually gone the last few years with the system disabled because of the law. Now I am going to use it the way it was intended to be used. I will be enjoying it during the day as I have been but coming in quietly to marinas at night.

I don't understand why some people just assume the masses are reckless with poor intentions. I think there are more people like me than not. :coolsm:

[VtSteve]

I have a 26' Chaparral cuddy; it's not an obnoxious boat. When switched to "loud," for lack of a better term, it doesn't sound obnoxious or even remotely close to annoying. It has a nice rumble to it. I'm thrilled that I can now switch to quiet when coming into a marina at night or other area where people would appreciate me switching to "quiet" and not get in trouble for trying to be considerate.

I've actually gone the last few years with the system disabled because of the law. Now I am going to use it the way it was intended to be used. I will be enjoying it during the day as I have been but coming in quietly to marinas at night.

I don't understand why some people just assume the masses are reckless with poor intentions. I think there are more people like me than not. :coolsm:

There are quite a few like you CL, wish there were more, but not bad.

When you have people that want everyone to like what they like or else, then you have issues. I live next to someone that likes complete silence 24/7. He's a hoot for sure. If I had a loud boat, I'd certainly be overly sensitive to the noise, and probably take it out less because of it. At least with the switchable exhaust you can do exactly like you do, and quiet it down at the channel, at night, coming into and leaving a dock.

It's a common courtesy that those that hat the switchable exhaust would never extend to you. My boat is very quiet, and not overly fast. But I still get sneers and even the infamous bird from blowboaters. I smile and wave, a real wave. If you read enough of these threads, you can certainly pick out the attitudes.

[ApS]

When switched to "loud," for lack of a better term...
No better term exists. :rolleye1:

I live next to someone that likes complete silence 24/7. He's a hoot for sure.
Then I don't think it's a good idea to take the muffler off, and run your lawnmower at night! :eek2:

I don't understand why some people just assume the masses are reckless with poor intentions. I think there are more people like me than not. :coolsm:
1) "Switchable Exhausts" are clearly in the minority. Why anyone would draw from their discretionary funds, to enable extra noise is very unclear to me. Too much money? :confused:

2) The masses are heard very well by those who are lakeside. :rolleye1: As another has written on these pages: "I love the sound of my own horn". :rolleye2:

3) For 30,000 years, Lake Winnipesaukee has been silent. No matter how "enjoyable" one's noise-pollution may seem, why would anyone with good intentions, change that primordial image of Lake Winnipesaukee for everyone else? :eek2:


I've actually gone the last few years with the system disabled because of the law. Now I am going to use it the way it was intended to be used. I will be enjoying it during the day as I have been but coming in quietly to marinas at night.
That's just fine for your neighbors, but what about those who are not your neighbors?

[VtSteve]

It's nice to have some peace and quiet once in awhile for sure. Weekdays on the lake are fairly subdued no? There were probably 4 dozen boats that passed in front of my house here on the broad lake in Champlain yesterday, probably a new record. A small Hobie Cat nearly ran into me yesterday near the beach. I was at anchor :eek: Good thing those boats can tack quickly.

Personally, I think the switchable exhaust is a win-win situation. In fact, if more people that had them used them when appropriate, it would alleviate some of the closed quarter noise in channels, at night at the docks, and similar situations.

Yes, there are boats that are noisy when running on plane, some more so than others. When you're on a larger lake, not everyone is going to be happy all the time. Heck, many problems occur on small lakes with slower speeds due to congestion. You have to pick your happy medium of tolerance.


Acres per Second
1) "Switchable Exhausts" are clearly in the minority. Why anyone would draw from their discretionary funds, to enable extra noise is very unclear to me. Too much money?

2) The masses are heard very well by those who are lakeside. As another has written on these pages: "I love the sound of my own horn".

3) For 30,000 years, Lake Winnipesaukee has been silent. No matter how "enjoyable" one's noise-pollution may seem, why would anyone with good intentions, change that primordial image of Lake Winnipesaukee for everyone else?



In number 1 You relate Switchable Exhausts to "enable extra noise". It's not only an irrational statement, but inaccurate as well. Yes, there are smaller boats that have engines perfectly capable of using underwater exhausts. In some cases, these small boats offer the switchable exhausts as an option. Not my cup of tea, and doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Having a noisy 23' bowrider just never appealed to me, nor a noisy wakeboard boat, etc.. It's the larger boats with engines that require different exhausts where the Switchable option is a good choice.

#2 Not my cup of tea either, but many like it, and some do want to draw attention to themselves. Surprise surprise, people are different all over.

#3 There's never common ground for those that want to return to yesteryear, versus those that accept some degree of change. Be that cottages to houses, small boats to larger boats, and the inevitable sailors versus the world discussions. There were no race tracks or loud crazy cars 30,000 years ago either. No airplanes, no Mount, not much of anything. Imagine how the people that live close to your racetrack feel about the noise, the ones that lived there before it was built.

Your all or nothing approach will never work, as it always revolves around your personal interests only. That's never been how the world works, even well before engines of any time period.

[Formula]

I was told by a dealer that the law is still in effect and that switchable Exhaust is still illegal.
Can someone confirm?
Thanks

[Dave R]

I was told by a dealer that the law is still in effect and that switchable Exhaust is still illegal.
Can someone confirm?
Thanks

Here is the current law:

270:25 Muffling Devices. –
I. No person shall own or operate or sell or offer for sale, within the jurisdiction of this state, a boat propelled in whole or in part by gas, gasoline, diesel, or naphtha unless the boat is provided with an underwater exhaust or other muffling device constructed and used so as to muffle the noise of the explosion. Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to require an underwater exhaust or other muffling device on a boat that is being sold for salvage purposes.
II. A boat may be equipped with a switchable device that will reduce the exhaust noise level in compliance with the limits established by RSA 270:37.
III. The provisions of this section shall not apply to antique boats or classic boats which have met the decibel levels established in RSA 270:37 and have been issued a permit exempting them from this section. For the purposes of this section "antique boat'' means a boat built prior to 1943 and "classic boat'' means a boat built between 1943 and 1968 inclusive.
IV. No person shall own, operate, sell, or offer for sale any boat which is capable of discharging exhaust above the water unless the boat is equipped with muffling devices.