Modern Vespa

very true, we don't want to offend anyone and i am sorry about the tree hugger comment.

i too have a friend who is a SMART enviro. he has a regular car that he maintains very well, he uses his blue can for recycling and buys from whole foods that does alot of local marketing practices. he also has a couple 2t's.


hey, that's me

Yay for you! There would be less pollution and much less bullshit if people were to take a sensible approach like this, instead of buying a Prius and lecturing everyone else on how to save the world...

Jimmy James just want to have his "karma" stamp to be a full circle...

I'LL TAKE MY 2T'S OVER A FULL CIRCLE ANYDAY 8)

Don't worry Jimmy James..I will vote for ya! Go GREEN!

i guess i should start repping more of your guys posts. I think my rep counts for more anyways.

i know i'm in good company when i'm chatin it up with jason and eric

Or in the past, with the Bajaj Chetak and Legend from 2002-2005. Tough, albeit slow(er) machines. I understand that the new 4t Stella is an improvment in the motivational power department.

And truly modern DI engines like those used in the Aprilia SR50 (it's direct injection of oil and gas separately, not "direct injection" as is becoming popular on autos), is very nearly pollution-free, at least for a 2t.

Unless you are daily commuting on a poorly running 2t, I wouldn't worry about the amount of pollution that you are putting out. For commuting/daily use, I think that a 4t is a better choice, but you just can't beat the feel and yes, smell of a 2t to help capture that vintage scooter experience.

Wouldn't be a good idea on a P200. Newer PX150s are restricted for their own engine size... on an older 200cc you'd be constricting things down a lot from a stock setup. You'd also have to retune so it ran well.

I wouldn't worry about the 2-stroke thing. "Green" people are always trying to restrict diesel vehicle use, but my father's VW TDI is an amazingly beautiful machine. That sucker gets better fuel economy than a hybrid, and in 5 years he has put 250,000 miles on it and it still runs like new. Additionally, diesel is more crude, so I imagine it is subjected to less processing (which takes energy). Take a car which got near 70 mpg on cruise control from VT to NYC and will outlast many other cars by years and try to tell me it is environmentally unfriendly.

It's all a bunch of pet issues... people are becoming concerned about the environment, but don't know how to fix anything, so they latch onto something to harp about... diesel, 2-strokes, nuclear power. You can hear all sorts of bad things about them if you listen for it, but there are good things to say as well in almost any case. Never black and white. As others have said, it takes lots of resources and spews emissions to make new vehicles.

Just enjoy your funky 30 year old motorscooter 8)

If you wanna go green and stop moaning

Nice retro color on that fine machine - how many ccs is that model?

not sure abot the cc's but its been dyno'd at 1/manpower

i think it have 2hfp = 2 human feets power works well in past i guess

Very cool. Didn't know that.
As far as the P's go, how would having fly side bearing lubricated directly from the oil pump cut down on emissions? Honest curiosity. Wouldn't the oil eventually make it's way through the case and up into the cylinder? Perhaps I'm not visualizing the case correct..
-Todd

put in a few fruit trees around yer house
grow some vegies without chemical fertilizer
hang out yer washing instead of those blow drier things
thats the best ive got

4t fumes are deadlier. They're invisible.

Like the SBDs of the scooter universe

Hi Steven while these guys debate or justify their use of 2strokes or blame hippies for the state of the planet.
It is possible to polute less and keep your scooter. The 200 cc is definatly the worst poluter no question. you could change to a new PX150 with a catalized exhaust engine, not a lot of power difference or better yet the Stella 150 passes euro 3 so is not that bad as a polluter. they both clip right onto your P200E.

What an amusing collection of suggestions and comments!

I was thinking about this today, and after finding this here chain, I wondered how folks' thinking has evolved over the last 10 years about pollution and fuel economy with shifty Vespas (and 'brettas). Mine has.

I know I can't do a lot about scrubbing the emissions. I just keep my 2-strokes stock (so far, rebuilt motors but no mods such as port work or bigger + faster flow carbs, racing exhausts or the like). I use 91 octane gas and synthetic 2T oil -- except with newly rebuilt motors, where I use mineral initially to hopefully help components set up nicely.

Coincidentally, I'm parking my 2 strokes for today while I take care of some other things. Maybe I'll ride my 4-stroke motorcycle to my destination, instead of taking a car or truck.

Now that we're past the point of no return on climate change, scientists are trying to figure a way to artificially mask earth from the sun. The particles in the atmosphere are actually keeping sun from it's full exposure further accelerating climate change. You're doing your small part in keeping the planet a little cooler.

It was strange seeing TBitzas posts. I miss the belligerent jerk. I mean that in a good way. Such a character.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_dimming

I don't feel guilty about riding my Vespas, either. Just to flog a dead horse (but to drive the point home), classic Vespas seem much worse than they are regarding air pollution. Yes, there's obvious smoke coming out of your exhaust, and none of the features of modern cars to cut emissions, but you're burning so little fuel. If your scooter is operating as it should, you're getting better fuel economy than a Prius. In the grand scheme of things you aren't polluting as much as you might think you are.

And to echo cuttlefish's attachment, one thing I really love about scooters is how they smell. I love going into my garage - eau de Vespa. The smell itself is a thrill.

Yeah, they're dirty, but with less fuel burned it's probably not as bad as it could be.

And, since the bike is decades old, it's replacing several motorbikes that didn't need to be manufactured during that time.

Going after our shifties is pointless. If a government really wants to reduce pollution in a city they would ban all petrol vehicles instead of introducing ways to generate revenue from congestion charging zones. I work in the City of London and I always look at the PTWs around. I rarely see any 2-stroke bikes. Most of us who own them use them for fun at the weekend. There are a few people on this forum who seem jealous of our bikes but apart from that we are not worth blaming. Move along nothing to see here.

Here's a little perspective.

https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:-12.0/centery:25.0/zoom:4

https://www.flightradar24.com/51,-2/6

https://bigthink.com/strange-maps/climate-change?rebelltitem=1#rebelltitem1

https://www.sciencealert.com/these-100-companies-are-to-blame-for-71-of-the-world-s-greenhouse-gas-emissions

I spent years worrying about my carbon footprint. Needless to say, I'm feeling pretty stupid these days.

Nail/head.

Sadly, more municipalities, especially in Europe, have been looking at banning 2-strokes from the city center.

Maybe, this is what they see:

Coal powered Vespa (art courtesy of Jayee Borcar)

I believe the worst part of the two-stroke pollution is not the oil smoke we see. It is the un-burned or partially burned fuel that is expelled when the engine doesn't scavenge well and misses a beat during idling. That enigmatic pop-pop-pop-

The oil smoke is just what everyone sees and can be mitigated by using good synthetic or low-smoke 2T oil.

This doesn't solve the problem though. But you NSM guys can still ride guilt free, I think.

Just the fact that you are not buying new is much much better than any gains that you could get from improving the 2T engine, most of the times the worst pollution is the actual buying of the new motorcycles(or virtually any product), because of the pollution of mining the raw materials, manufacturing process and shipping of the product.

So, I would just enjoy my old scooter!

i do feel guilty, thats why i plan tree in my house to replace nor equal the carbon that my vespa release, well somehow

guilt? no

But I do try and offset the impact as well as tune for efficiency and not just power. Been wanting to try tuning a bike to run on E85 but can't find it reliably enough yet.

The impacts in large cities is the smog, not the CO2, so I get why the bans are being put in place.

Zero guilt here. The net pollution generated from my 40 year old 2 strokes is virtually nothing compared to what is generated from the mining, manufacturing, and transportation of parts and supplies for new vehicles that get replaced every few years. I think I may actually be doing the environment a favor.

Zero guilt here either, for a variety of reasons:

-climate change alarmists seem to exclusively comprise blue-haired LGBTetc vegans, social justice warriors, 3rd wave feminists, neo-Marxist radicals, 16 year-old Asperger syndrome sufferers (is that the politically correct term?), and assholes with names rhyming with "the science guy"; basically a collection of people known for their rationality, levelheadedness, and moderate approach to all issues they set their focus on.

-there is enough evidence of drastic climate change episodes in the past (before the industrial revolution, which modern pollution largely finds its roots in) to doubt the official narrative of man-made change. The narrative of global warming, having started in the '70s has been sufficiently distorted, repurposed, and contradicted to be dubious in itself. Al Gore's inconvenient truth, based on the same flawed theories, predictably failed to deliver on the global catastrophes promised for the early 21st century.

-worst of all, the policies enforced to combat climate change (whatever happened to global warming?) seem to make no sense, and to be geared towards shifting the burden on the common folk rather than the industrial lobbies who have the ears of politicians. Here in Paris, vehicles made before 2000 are now banned on weekdays. Except all the old diesel trucks and vans used for delivery services or other professional uses. So if you drive to and from work 15 minutes each way on your 20 year-old moped, you're banned; but if you drive around all day in your beat-up van delivering parcels, you're a-ok. Go figure. If we're actually serious about addressing a climate emergency, shouldn't it be the other way around?
On the other hand, a 7-liter pickup truck registered in 2019 is allowed to be driven with no restrictions, while a 125cc scooter registered in 1998 is. Why? Because apparently, the 7L pickup was made according to current european norms, while the 1998 scooter had no norms to match at the time of manufacture. Never mind common sense and logic. In any case, the levels of pollution are calculated on a per-cc basis, and a 2019 vehicle generally is cleaner (per cc) than a 2-stroke scooter. But even so, are we to believe that a 7000cc engine pollutes less overall than a 123cc 2-stroke? Puleeze. Apparently the politicians promoting these policies do.

In any case, the climate change debate seems to systematically ignore one important factor: the demographic explosion in 3rd-world countries, mainly in Africa. It seems that unless overpopulation is addressed, any restrictions on fossil fuel usage will only serve to partly counteract the effects of exponential human growth.

To be clear, I don't deny the climate seems to be changing, or that internal combustion engines have an effect on pollution, and possibly on the climate. What I DO doubt is the politicized narrative based on the theory, and the efficacy of the solutions proposed.

The Earth will continue - with or without us on it. Frank has a point - the population...

I do feel our use of fossil fuels is the contributing factor to global warming - this time around. Also, the curve of population to sustainability on this planet is starting to head into hockey stick territory.

I keep getting this image of a big ole dog - soaking wet. Then the ole dog shakes - and water and everything else goes flying. The Earth - yep - the big ole dog....

I'll probably be long gone when that goes down, but it's coming.

And, of course, my opinion only, and you know what they say about opinions..

The science is solid, and the signature that human activity is the cause has been with us since ~1998. Since then the cause of the change has only really gotten firmer, but also more nuanced (misused by some to drive uncertainty)

Having unstable extremists be the "voice" for and against doing something about has not really helped, but rational discussion didn't seem to work either.

E85 may be a good thing for 2T and could extend our use while reducing the impact. I really want to setup a bike to run it, but need to be sure I can fill up when needed.

I'm with Frank. The more people are born in the 3rd world the less resources I can use in the 1st world. Obviously the people in the 3rd world are a problem and should also never be allowed to have a lifestyle similar to ours. That would be catastrophic for the environment.

I don't know if that was meant to be sarcastic, but it made me laugh anyway. And although you put it crudely, the gist is still correct.

I'm pretty sure the North American and Australian Babyboomer is more burdensome on the planet than a multitude of people in the developing world. They have the largest individual carbon footprint on earth. I once read that the North American middle-class family had a lifestyle comparable to a family of millionaires in the 1950's. It's pretty sweet life. Large homes, two cars, flying here and there and conspicuous consumption. The rest would of the developed world come in 3rd, 4th etc... in ranking. Also pretty nice lives. Best of luck telling the nouveau Chinese or other Asian middle-class and millionaires that they can't have the lifestyles the developed world has enjoyed for 50 years. We should be lucky that the median income of the Chinese is just $10.220 and they're not as wealthy as the typical American family. If you think the worlds tourists destinations are overcrowded now wait a few years. The good news is, as a person in the developing world becomes more wealthy they become more environmentally conscious. Whereas, the rest of the world consumed like there was no tomorrow for 50 years not caring about the planet, forcing a clean-up that could take a few generations. Environmentalism has been fast-tracked in Asia and elsewhere. Most likely because they are feeling the effects of climate change first.

https://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/02/opinion/02diamond.html

We don't need scientists to confirm pouring toxic crap into our water, air and ground isn't good for us or the earth. We all know that.

I'm with eBeth. Plant a tree, stop using chemicals on the garden, say no to plastic packaging, walk instead of drive when possible, hang the washing out to dry, etc.. do what you can do. Every little bit helps.

We all have a moral obligation to look after our planet and there's no arguing that.

We could change our behavior but that would involve personal sacrifice and that stuff is for hippies. So, blaming the poorest people who look the least like us makes sense.

Now how are we going to keep those populations down and the resources from them?

[quote="PureDrivenSnow"] We could change our behavior but that would involve personal sacrifice and that stuff is for hippies. So, blaming the poorest people who look the least like us makes sense.

Now how are we going to keep those populations down and the resources from them?[/quote

Don't knock the hippy's or the vegans for that matter. When the shtf and we start eating each other, they'll be worth their weight in gold... especially the vegans being organic and grass fed 😛... tasty and population control in one easy dish lol