A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!
1. Be Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.
4. Stay on topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do not repost content that has already been posted in this community.
Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.
In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:
According to city violation data aggregated by the popular website How’s My Driving NY, Aquilino did receive two tickets on that same day in the West Village for blowing through a red light and speeding in a school zone.
Supercars should be on racetracks, where they were designed for, instead of public roads. And Aquilino definitely should not be driving them on public roads.
It's pretty stupid that the law went after modifications, instead of just saying noise above x decibels is the issue.
Actually, the law does just say "above 85db" is not allowed. Doesn't matter if the car is stock or not.
Can you source this? I tried looking it up, and I found this
https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/newyorkcity/latest/NYCadmin/0-0-0-209188
and
https://portal.311.nyc.gov/article/?kanumber=KA-01102
Which seem more concerned about how far away you can hear a vehicle from, rather than a specified decibel rating (But maybe that's just a simpler way to measure decibel?)
It's a way to assess dB without a gauge on hand.
Fun fact: any stock car that is this loud has something called an “exhaust valve” or a cutout. It’s an electronic device that adjusts the sound of the exhaust. Responsible super car owners only open this valve on the track, or in other appropriate places. I hope they repossess his little toy.
It is no coincidence that the valves typically open in "sport" or "race" modes and in "street" mode the valves are closed.
I don't know if this is well known, but Lamborghini has a track record of loud exhaust, period. Regardless of valve state. Huracan Performante owners requested that Lamborghini make the next special edition a little quieter. Reason being the Performante was too loud even on race tracks. Track day drivers know there are noise limits that vary by track. You're asked to leave immediately if you exceed the limit. You may also receive a temporary ban and/or fine.
What did Lamborghini do? Make the Huracan STO even louder across all driving modes. The company demonstrates it believes noise limits themselves are annoying. While I do like loud cars myself, sometimes a noise compliant normal or comfort mode doesn't exist.
It shouldn't even be legal to operate an exhaust loud enough to require hearing protection.
"I feel that if the residents are upset by noise and the city wants to crack down on noise — I don’t disagree with it," Aquilino said. "I disagree with if a car is unmodified and you want to fine them."
Massive ego on this sack of shit. "Residents are upset by noise but if the noise is stock then it is fine."
I understand where he is coming from. If the car is street legal, he shouldn't have gotten a fine for using it. The problem is that cars that produce such levels of noise are street legal.
Lambos aren't quiet, but if you drive them gently then they aren't loud enough to set off the noise camera.
So this is a bit like arguing someone should be allowed to blast their music at midnight just because the speakers were legal to buy and own. If a city implements noise restrictions to protect the health and well-being of their residents then people have a legal and moral obligation to do their best to comply even if that means driving your lambo slowly through residential areas.
Every single car you and I have ever owned, are presumably street legal, yet they can reach speeds that are illegal almost everywhere.
Similarly, every knife I have ever owned has the necessary sharpness to cut meat... yet I am not supposed to cut human meat. I am pretty certain the car would not reach undesirable noise levels if he were not speeding or revving the engine, etc. So it is more on him for HOW he is using the car and not how the car was built
So his reasoning sounds legit, but it really is not.
Just because it's stock doesn't mean the driver can't rev the engine way too hard and loud like a crazy person, engine braking loud at shit down the street in the middle of the night, yeah could be annoying
Some others have mentioned there may be a distinction between levels of noise when the car is in some sort of "street" mode. I have zero sympathy if there is a street legal mode that he turned off while on public roads.
The car can do 200 miles per hour, and yet there are speed limits. Should he be exempt?
Duh, it can go 200 mph stock.
Whats the noise level if the car is driving at a reasonable speed in the city?
I imagine it's only excessively noisy if they are showing off, revving the engine, and/or streeet racing
That car cruising at 30 mph in the city is probably louder than a Honda Civic when you put the loud pedal all the way down on the freeway.
Street legal doesn't mean incapable of violating noise regulations if misused just like speed laws or any other traffic laws. Most gas engine cars can produce extreme amounts of noise just not when used as intended for driving on streets.
This is still a goofy line of reasoning. If you, for example, are driving a truck equipped with engine retarder brakes, in quite a lot of municipalities you literally aren't allowed to use them because they are too loud for neighbourhoods. You risk getting a fine.
Revving a lambo is exactly the same.
I fucking hate these things so much. I'm not as opposed to cars as many others in this sub, i need a car for work and i have a car that i sometimes drive on the weekends. Lamborghinis especially are such a thorn in my eyes, they look like ass, they are LOUD as shit, and not under load, they are just loud all the time. They are way to wide for normal streets and the most impractical things ever. And because they are only driven by cunts, they are extra loud. Peasant cars have to follow rules, but as soon as you have enough money: well, timmy needs a v12 racecar and they are very loud, that makes sense, right?
I found it weird he complained about “how can anyone afford this?” referring to the tickets.
First off, they’re supposed to be high to enforce the law and secondly how are you complaining about the cost while driving a $300k car around?
tax the rich.
Or eat them. I'd support either.
Mulch them, their diets make the meat taste nasty and have higher concentrations of mercury.
Let the earth leech the sickness from their corpses and turn it into next year's crops.
Sell your fucking car to pay for it, I don't care. Maybe a Prius will fix your attitude
Ah yes, my car is stock so I should be able to disturb the whole neighbourhood with my car.
I get it, sports cars are fun to drive, but they very much don't need to be this loud.
I want noise cameras in my neighborhood
Sounds like it shouldn't be considered legal for onroad use there. :/
oooh i wish i had one of these, wanker bikers like to rev their engines down our street
LoUd pIPEs sAvE liVEs
I literally cannot hear you in my 1.2 litre Korean shitbox you insufferable oaf
Can we please get these in Vancouver? So many loud losers that just need to make sure everyone can hear how cool they are
He's not exactly wrong. On the face of it, it is a legal contradiction.
NY says the car is legal to drive anywhere within the state.
Then a local government sets a noise ordnance, making the car essentially illegal to drive in that part of the state.
The conflicting laws need to get sorted out. No different than states not being able to make laws that go against federal law.
If they take the same stance as State vs Federal, then the local ordnance being more restrictive than the states would supersede the state law. At the same time it could become unreasonable for individuals to research all the local ordinances they may encounter in a 20 mile trip.
So yah. It's easy to say "Asshole drives an expensive loud car and complains about the fine."
But there is more nuance and complications here that could go well beyond cars.
There is no contradiction. Just because the vehicle is licensed for street use doesn't give the owner permission to operate it in ways that violates the law.
You could argue the same about emission zones which are common across Europe (mainly in inner cities). Just because your vehicle is allowed on the road, it doesn't you can drive it anywhere.
At the same time it could become unreasonable for individuals to research all the local ordinances they may encounter in a 20 mile trip.
It is extremely reasonable. Drivers are always responsible to learn the laws of places they drive. Are you only required to follow the law of your plate's state/province? Is turning right on red in NYC okay if you are plated outside the city?
I'm with you. But the consequence to sort out the contradiction might be also a state-wide ban if certain boundaries are exceeded.
Aren't there noise ordinances in every city? Do you look up the specific decibel levels for every city you drive through?