That’s not an issue, because you would tint around it.How close can you get the strip on the windshield to the rearview mirror area without interfering with the light/rain sensors?
That’s not an issue, because you would tint around it.How close can you get the strip on the windshield to the rearview mirror area without interfering with the light/rain sensors?
That's a good question---Also with the strip or full windshield tint, do they have to remove the rear view mirror?How close can you get the strip on the windshield to the rearview mirror area without interfering with the light/rain sensors?
Most people who get tint are doing it for the same two reasons. They like the way it looks and/or they want the privacy. UV protection is a bonus. If that weren't the case, people would be applying legal tint.I seem to get an awful lot of direct sun through my drivers side window. I have some pre-cancer stuff on my arms from construction work through the years. Am thinking of doing one of the higher level UV blocking tints. Would like some feedback, ( pros/cons ) from those of you who have done this. .....
You can't really get noticeably darker than 5% without it being opaque. What do you consider "dark" if you didn't think it was that dark?I was running with 5% tint at that time. It was already installed on the (used) vehicle when I bought it. ..... I didn't even like it that dark.
They'll do it here in Ohio too. I've gotten 2 tickets in my life. One was a parking ticket (meter expired) and one was for window tint. I had 35% and legal limit here in Ohio is 50%.I figure the only cops that will care about illegal tint are the Idaho State Bulls. If I get pulled over by one, I'll do my best to hide them. If he cites me, I'll pay the fine.
Not likely. If the police aren't going to enforce a law, why have the law to begin with? I'm not going down that political rabbit whole though.There's nothing worse than cops pulling people over for petty crap like that. I've been driving in CDA since I was 16 and I have probably been pulled over a dozen times or more and I've only been cited one time and that was by an Idaho State Bull.
Hopefully with all of the "defund the police" campaigns running rampant in this country, police departments decide to eliminate these type of patrols.
My installer didn't need to remove the mirror. I don't know if it's a judgement call on the installer's part or if that's standard practice.That's a good question---Also with the strip or full windshield tint, do they have to remove the rear view mirror?
Re-read what Mikeru82 said. He said he didn't even like it that dark.Most people who get tint are doing it for the same two reasons. They like the way it looks and/or they want the privacy. UV protection is a bonus. If that weren't the case, people would be applying legal tint.
That said, if you're solely concerned with UV protection for your arms you can get 70 - 80 % tint that blocks 99% of the UV light. → LINK HERE
To give you an idea of how "dark" that is, most factory windows already have 70% tint, which looks basically clear. Your windows will have a small label etched onto it. You'll notice on the bottom of my Jeep's label it lists 70% transparency. I haven't looked to see what the Ram say, but this is common.
View attachment 110888
You can't really get noticeably darker than 5% without it being opaque. What do you consider "dark" if you didn't think it was that dark?
They'll do it here in Ohio too. I've gotten 2 tickets in my life. One was a parking ticket (meter expired) and one was for window tint. I had 35% and legal limit here in Ohio is 50%.
Not likely. If the police aren't going to enforce a law, why have the law to begin with? I'm not going down that political rabbit whole though.
But speaking of "petty" violations, that's how bigger offenses are found. I can assure you, if someone steals your truck, the most likely scenario for it being recovered is out of a "petty" violation. Most cops don't run every license plate they see, so unless they're looking for that specific stolen vehicle it's going to go unnoticed until they run the plate for some other reason.
This may be beyond some members age here, but Timothy McVeigh (Oklahoma City bomber) was caught as a result of a petty traffic stop. He killed 168 and injured hundreds more, and he was caught because his truck didn't have a visible plate on it. Very minor offense, and you catch a mass murderer. Just sayin.
Back to tint.
OP, as I mentioned most people get tint for looks and privacy, with a bonus of UV protection. I also want those things, but I want protection too. That same company that makes the tint I linked makes security film too. I have that on my truck. It cost a bit more, but it's nice knowing that people can't see into the truck real well, but even if they try to smash a window they're not going to have an easy go of it.
My tint is 40% front 5% rear. Those are tested values on the window so that includes the stock tint. IIRC the film was 50 and 20. I have nothing extra on the windshield.
View attachment 110891
Oh, that makes more sense. Sorry, hadn't had my coffee yet I guess.Re-read what Mikeru82 said. He said he didn't even like it that dark.
I heard that too and it's stupid (just my opinion). If something is illegal you can be stopped for it even if it's very minor and a pretext for something bigger (the United States Supreme Court has ruled on this). Quite simply, it's either illegal or not. If they don't want police stopping someone for driving 35 mph in a 25 zone, raise the speed limit to 35. Either 35 is dangerous or not. If the limit is 25 and you can be stopped.Concerning my post about cops not pulling people over for minor infractions. It's very likely because it's already happening.
![]()
Why Philadelphia has banned low-level traffic stops
City councilmember Isaiah Thomas, who spearheaded the new legislation, says the new rule was inspired in part by his own experiences with police as a Black man.www.npr.org
It is stupid, but so are the rest of the woke reactions. It looks like this legislation will result in something positive for the rest of the population. (cops not pulling you over for a burned out taillight, not wearing your seat belt, etc).I heard that too and it's stupid (just my opinion). If something is illegal you can be stopped for it even if it's very minor and a pretext for something bigger (the United States Supreme Court has ruled on this). Quite simply, it's either illegal or not. If they don't want police stopping someone for driving 35 mph in a 25 zone, raise the speed limit to 35. Either 35 is dangerous or not. If the limit is 25 and you can be stopped.
They cite racism as the reason for this and say minority drivers are more likely to be stopped for a minor violation than white drivers. Well that's because there are less white people in Phili than other races so of course they're more likely to be stopped.
A study by the Philadelphia Research Initiative issued in 2011 (Reference link) showed 562,585 white people made up the population of 1,526,006. Keep in mind this is a 10 year old study, and at the time the white population was declining. If that trend continued they're likely less than 36.9% of the population that they were at the time. That makes me wonder if they constituted more than 37% of the traffic stops for minor offenses? If not, aren't they being racially targeted? After all the number of stops should closely resemble your population. Therefore, it's logical that minority drivers were more likely to be stopped, because minorities are the majority in the area.
You have 100 marbles 60 green and 40 red. You put 10 in a in a bag, 7 red marbles, 3 green. You are more likely to pull a red marble out of the bag because the population of that bag isn't the same as the total that you have. That doesn't make you racist against red or imply that you're targeting red. It's just a statistical probability.
It does not.So again, back to tint. @brian42, I haven't heard of this crystalline tint. So you're saying it's clearer? I've only ever noticed "distortion" when wearing polarized lenses, does this not happen with that?
Plenty of people have theirs tinted with no issues including me but I only did 70% ceramic as I still want to get light through mineHi, my tint guy won’t tint the sunroof, says it will shatter? Is there any truth to that?
Interesting. Polar rainbow is a better description than distortion, and more accurately describes how it looks through a polarized lens. It's not bad through my tint and kind of depends on where the sun is. I'd say radios and phones look far worse than the tint, but with the right angle I do get a little through the windows.It does not.
I get some of the “polar rainbow” on my 8.4” screen in the dash but nothing on the tint. Vision is crystal clear through all windows.
Yes that is correct. The film I use has the same UV and heat protection regardless of VLT (Visible Light Transmission). With quality films you can get the same protection without obscuring vision if you want to.Has anyone had any experience with " Rayno Window Film ". The closest shop to me uses that product. They told me that their " S-9 " top level of ceramic has the same UV and heat blocking in all 5 shades, ( 5-70 ). Does that sound correct that the shade doesn't have anything to do with UV/heat.
Yes there is some truth to this, but technically it can happen with any window. If heat isn't evenly dissipating through the glass it could build up on one side of the glass or the other (inside/outside). In some cases this differential is enough to fracture the glass.Hi, my tint guy won’t tint the sunroof, says it will shatter? Is there any truth to that?