REVscene - Vancouver Automotive Forum

MK-EK · 02-03-2009, 05:01 PM

care to share experiences?!

thanks

sho_bc · 02-03-2009, 05:09 PM

No more than people without it.

CRS · 02-03-2009, 07:18 PM

As in smoked as in illegal?

skidmark · 02-03-2009, 07:38 PM

I not only bugged them, I wrote tickets for it. Use search....

zulutango · 02-03-2009, 08:06 PM

Let's see...I want to make my brake & signal lights harder to see....yes...that's a good idea.

sho_bc · 02-03-2009, 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CRS

As in smoked as in illegal?

woops! i should get more sleep. I thought he was talking about tinted windows... Yeah. Tinting lights is stupid.

CRS · 02-03-2009, 08:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sho_bc

woops! i should get more sleep. I thought he was talking about tinted windows... Yeah. Tinting lights is stupid.

I was wondering why your first post was like that. I had to reread the title to make sure I wasn't on crack.

german-anger · 02-03-2009, 10:10 PM

I think it depends how bright your tails light up... and if your tails stay lit while driving. Keep them bright or opt for black housing instead of tinting the housing. My 2 cents.

wing_woo · 02-04-2009, 08:31 AM

Unfortunately, if you tint them, you lose them as a reflector. I followed cars before that are tinted and the difference in brightness is not that much. It's actually hard to see them sometimes because they look like only your taillights are on when you step on the brake.

zulutango · 02-04-2009, 10:12 AM

Just so we know what we're talking about here.. 4.02 says that you may ONLY use approved lights, reflectors etc.

General lighting requirements
4.02 (1) A vehicle on a highway must only be equipped with and use lamps, reflectors or other illuminating devices authorized by this Division or authorized in writing by the director.

(2) A vehicle on a highway must be equipped with lamps equivalent to those provided by the original manufacturer in accordance with the requirements that applied under the Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Canada), or a predecessor to that Act, at the time of vehicle manufacture.

(3) All lamps, lamp bulbs and reflectors required or permitted by this Division must comply with

(a) the approved standards established by the Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Canada) and the applicable SAE standards,

(b) the conditions of use described in this Division, and

(c) the requirements of Table 1 of the Schedule to this Division.

of this section.

This section says you may NOT shield, cover etc them.
General maintenance
4.04 (1) Lighting devices required by this Division must be maintained in good working order.

(2) Lamps and reflectors required by this Division

((c) must not be shielded, covered or obscured by any part of the vehicle or load or by dirt or other material.

The provincial inspection manual says that any vehicle made after 1970 must NOT remove any original lights, reflectors and they are supposed to "reject" your vehicle (i.e. FAIL) if is in this condition.

If you can meet the requirements of the Regs and the Inspection manual, then your lights, reflectors etc are legal. If not, they are not.

MK-EK · 02-04-2009, 01:34 PM

well i actually talked to like 3 cops about this issue and they said that they wont bug u about them

maybe they are tricking me!

Gtrr33 · 02-04-2009, 01:37 PM

that is soo 1996

wing_woo · 02-04-2009, 01:38 PM

if anything, they'll get you for no rear red reflector, unless you have one of those newer cars where the rear red reflector is on the bumper or somewhere else.

zulutango · 02-04-2009, 03:18 PM

Karma is when somebody rear-ends you because of the illegal mods and ICBC holds YOU responsible. I know of several cases where happened.

natedawg90 · 02-04-2009, 03:52 PM

I have my turn signals and the reverse lights tinted on my civic and I have had no problems yet but thats just those lights and not the actual brake lights.

underscore · 02-04-2009, 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sho_bc

woops! i should get more sleep. I thought he was talking about tinted windows... Yeah. Tinting lights is stupid.

haha so did I, I didn't get why he had to ask that question.

zulutango · 02-05-2009, 05:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by natedawg90

I have my turn signals and the reverse lights tinted on my civic and I have had no problems yet but thats just those lights and not the actual brake lights.

So you are saying that it's not important to see your turn signals or reverse lights? See above re: ICBC holding you responsible. I know one case in particular where a turning vehicle with illegally modded turn signals, was rear-ended. ICBC is holding the turning responsible because the signals were not visible. In addition, the driver was also seriously injured and was off work for months as a result of the crash. Guess who is paying his bills? He is...and for the damage to the other vehicle as well.

greendb7 · 02-05-2009, 11:05 AM

Tinting my tailights would be the LAST thing I'd ever do to my car, if I was forced to mod my car at gunpoint or something
I don't get why people would automatically make it their fault in any accident situation by doing this

gnu5 · 02-17-2009, 11:45 AM

what if i put a vinyl around the lights but not obstructing the actual brake lights and turn signals but more of just the extra tail light housing?

zulutango · 02-17-2009, 11:52 AM

"General maintenance
4.04 (1) Lighting devices required by this Division must be maintained in good working order.

(2) Lamps and reflectors required by this Division

(a) must be securely mounted on the vehicle,

(b) must not have any cracked, broken, missing or incorrectly installed lenses, and a lamp must not have bent or broken rims that allow water to enter the lamp, and

(c) must not be shielded, covered or obscured by any part of the vehicle or load or by dirt or other material."

If what you are planning does not affect the required lights or reflectors in any way and is Federally-approved equipment, then it is legal. Just guessing at what you have said above, but it seems like you will be breaking the law by what you are planning. If it's on the chrome or outer housing, or between them, so that it does not touch any actual lights/reflectors , then it could not affect the required lights or reflectors could it?

gnu5 · 02-17-2009, 12:15 PM

http://s2.photobucket.com/albums/y42...ent=tgtr3c.jpg
something like this, as you can see, it doesnt block out the brake lights or anything just the surrounding housing

zulutango · 02-17-2009, 12:37 PM

The fact that it is covering the factory reflectors alone would not make it legal, unless the reflectors under the black covers were the exact size as the holes and the black just surrounded them. The picture seems to show that the black covers are a sheet with a series of holes cut in it so that some of the red reflector underneath can be seen, the rest is covered by the tint. THAT is NOT legal.

Here is what the stock lights look like. The tint covers the legally required equipment..
http://z.about.com/d/cars/1/7/R/e/ag_07g35_rear.jpg

gnu5 · 02-17-2009, 12:54 PM

thats a sedan you are looking at, the reflectors on the coupe are on the side of the lights, basically all the tint is covering is the excess red in which it doesnt have any lighting, the circular holes are actually individual LED's and that they are not being covered up by anything. hope that clarifies it?

zulutango · 02-17-2009, 05:54 PM

http://activerain.com/blogsview/4100...coupe-for-sale

OK here is a coupe. Anything that is red back there is part of the tail light/reflector/signal light assembly. Cover that up and you are breaking the law. Just because the actual bulb is in one part does not mean that the rest is not part of the light/reflector. I would guess that the parts book would call the red plastic area either a tail light lens or reflector or assembly...or something similar to that. I would bet that if you ordered a replacement the entire assembly would come in one piece. I'm not trying to be mean, just telling you that any Traffic Member I know would consider that you had obstructed the light/reflector by installing the black stuff. I know that is not what you wanted to hear.