Removing California Emissions Equipment?

Take a look at the following photo. Attached to the bike frame just forward of the engine is what looks to be an emissions canister required by the State of California where the bike was originally sold.



Am I mistaken in that identification or not? If not, can the canister be safely removed in Arizona without backlash either technically or legally? And would it be of benefit to do so?

not sure on the legality of removing the cannister but removing it shoudl be as simple as pulling it off and capping off the lines that were running into it

Not sure what the benefits to removing it would be, other than "Emissions Control BAD"

Thanks Chuck. Like you I don't know if removing the canister actually helps or not. Guess I'll have to break down and Google it to see what others have to say.

From the SouthBayRiders web site, quoting AlanRider7, the following pretty much sums up where I now am in respect to the question of removing emissions equipment:



Another poster, Looscruz, had this to say:



Pending anyone coming up with a better argument to the contrary, I think I'll leave the emissions canister and associated plumbing alone! Besides, someone suggested the canister itself can easily be disguised with a "NOS" sticker, making heads turn!

thanks for your post and thanks for the research. when i got my xt the first thing i wondered was, can i take that emissions crap off without messing anything up? i came to the conclusion that looscruz did that it wasn't worth the trouble and could be a problem in the future. the emissions tank on the xt is not heavy enough to warrent removal. great idea about the NOS sticker.

I am not a hack or a butcher. I am a trained mechanic with 32 years experience. I have removed ALL the emissions controls from every motorcycle I have ever owned, as well as all the safety devices, like the sidestand switch, the switch that prevents it from starting in gear, and the switch that prevents it from starting without the clutch being pulled in. All that stuff on my Vulcan 1500 streetbike DID weigh over 22 pounds, but it also included a very complex air injection system.


We do have emissions tests here, I live in the only county in the U.S. that does. I have NEVER had any problems getting any of my bikes through the emissions test EXCEPT the XT, and that came without any emissions equipment. Turned out to be a carburetor issue.


First of all, I hate the EPA, second, I hate emissions equipment, which is just needless clutter on bikes. A charcoal cannister? I use gasoline in an open container to clean parts. I like my bikes to be free of anything that doesn't either serve a purpose, or look good. Emissions crap and "safety" switches do neither, and are just in the way. Removing this "JUNK" will not likely make your bike run any better, but it won't run any worse either. And at least you will be able to fill your gas tank all the way full without also filling up the damn charcoal cannister, and causing starting and running problems.



Neither my 1964 Ford Fairlane, nor my 1975 Ford F250 truck came from the factory with any kind of emissions controls, the Fairlane is old enough to be exempt from emissions tests, and the truck passes just fine. I will never buy a late model car or truck covered up in computerized electronics and emissions garbage. As a mechanic, I had to work on this trash, which is one reason I am no longer a paid professional mechanic. Sorry if I got a little carried away, I am a classic vehicle enthusiast, and this is something I am very passionate about. Jerry.

jerry. i drive a 1970 chevrolet big block with dual exhaust and there is no way it would ever pass smog in califronia. love those oldies but goodies, but fuel prompted me to rethink and buy the xt. even with the carb and exhaust mods it still gets 75mpg unlike my truck that gets 9.

My '75 F250 has a 390 four barrel, and a dual exhaust. It also gets about 9 mpg. The Fairlane is a 200ci straight 6, and gets about 18 mpg. I bought the truck mostly for hauling dirt bikes, quads, and occasionally borrow my in-laws boat and camp trailer.

Neither have A/C, although I plan on putting A/C in the Fairlane before next summer. Neither of them are show cars, they are daily drivers, but I wouldn't trade either one of them for a new one.


I am very much a purest when it comes to vehicles, and do not believe electronics and vehicles go together. Electronics are extremely failure prone, and problems cannot be diagnosed without $10,000 worth of computerized diagnostic equipment.


I also like the fact that they do not have EFI, catalytic converters, EGR valves, air injection, air bags, plastic bumpers, designed in self destruct zones, etc.


It makes me sad to see the same thing that happened to cars now happening to motorcycles.


This new technology has it's place, I just don't believe vehicles is the place for it. Jerry.

luddites of the world unite

Like yourself Jerry, many people are passionate about whatever side of this [or any other] issue they settle on. However in this case, once we get to the heart of your argument in behalf of stripping out all vestiges of emissions equipment, your admission that doing so won't effect the way the bike runs one way or the other is most noteworthy - and pretty much aligns with everything else I've read from both sides of the aisle.

Also like yourself, I too owned and drove old Ford pickups. In my case my favorite was a 1968 F100 with a granny gear four speed and a 390 V-8. Traded for that truck in 1970 with 35,000 miles on it and drove it every day for the next 17 years. Did every bit of work necessary on it myself; tune-ups, carburetors, clutches, U-joints, axle bearings, drive shafts, etc., etc. Having nothing in the way of emissions equipment to contend with was just the way things were in those days, and none of us ever thought we'd see the day when such things along with computer chips and advanced electronics would come to be standard issue in vehicles.

But that was then and this is now. And as long as these technologies help to reduce pollution and keep our vehicles running better and cleaner than they otherwise would, for my part I'll work with them and not against them.

As far as the XT is concerned, since even the most strident anti-emissions equipment advocates admit that the simple charcoal canister evap system used on it is not adding to or detracting from the way the bike runs, I won't strip the system off in that case.

"luddites of the world unite" Right on. Don't know how you meant that, but I like it.


George, you are correct. It is only my opinion, but one which I have very strong feelings about. I'm 50, I have always been a hot rodder, and my whole life has revolved around mechanical things (and my 2 daughters, both grown now)I turned both of them into grease monkeys at a very early age. I have an intense dislike for anything electronic or emissions related on any type of vehicle. That will not change. I expect to keep the 2 vehicles I have for the rest of my life, and if something should happen to one of them, I will find something even older to replace it with.



However, while I have built and rebuilt many car engines, and put all kinds of exhaust and carb setups on car engines, I don't like messing with the carb jetting and stock exhausts on motorcycles. That may seem strange, but I just don't see motorcycles as performance machines. If I need more power, I'll just get a more powerful motorcycle. So far, every motorcycle I've ever owned, including the XT, has satisfied me powerwise when running correctly, without any modifiations to increase power. What I need from the XT is better rear suspension.

I won't go any further with the emissions thing, since it is something everyone tends to have very strong feelings about, one way or another. Jerry.

No one imagines it will Jerry. And that's OK! We need guys around who still know how to work on older vehicles and do things right. Simpler is very often better. No one argues that it isn't!

That's part of the reason we love these older technology XT225's isn't it! They're rather simple machines. Little in the way of electronics except for basic stuff like lights and ignition and such. Most of what needs doing on these bikes is stuff we can do ourselves. So if a California mandated evap emissions canister is the most anyone has to deal with on an XT225 in the way of techie stuff, seems to me we're pretty much good to go!