Jump to content
SAU Community

Tinting and Regency.

P1E

By P1E,
in South Australia

 Share

Recommended Posts

P1E Mentor

P1E

Posted
Posted

I am getting my car tinted next week and have a couple of questions.

I know that 75% fronts and 35% rears are legal, but I have heard from a couple of reliable sources that Regency will fail a car for having any tint whatsoever. This doesn't really make any sense, but then again I have heard so many stories about Regency that it doesn't really surprise me. What if I took in a copy of the legislation? Or would that just fire them up?

If I am going to be ****ed over for legal tint, I had might as well go 5% all around. Is darker tint more expensive than lighter tint?

Any advice?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/50710-tinting-and-regency/
Share on other sites
Nozila Grand Master

Nozila

Posted
Posted

i have tint on my car mate. 35% sides and 32% back if i can remember correctly. There is no difference in price for percentage of tint, the difference is in the quality of tint you choose. I have endurance i think it was and it cost me $300 almost a year ago and is still at that price - my gf got same tint done as me at the same place.

jager Community Regular

jager

Posted
Posted

yep its true been defected for having tint on the passenger and driver side window + at the same time a sticker on the front windscreen in the tint line, sent to regency for this i kicked up a fuss a the local cop station next thing ya know defect sticker off and no regency tour but the sticker and tint came off, next hour sticker back on(wasn't actually defectable) cop ona power trip next time go around the RBT

P1E Mentor

P1E

Posted
  • Author
Posted

:confused:

Have you all been defected and/or ****ed around for having front window tinting? As long as it is 75% or higher, it's legal.

It's all here:

[b]Window Tinting:[/b]



44. (1) Glazing used in a windscreen of a motor vehicle must have a luminous transmittance of at least: 



(a) for a motor vehicle built after 1971—75%; or

(b) for another motor vehicle—70%. 



(2) Windscreen glazing of a motor vehicle must not be coated in a way that reduces its luminous transmittance.



(3) However, subrules (1) and (2) do not apply to the greater of the following areas of a windscreen:



(a) the area above the highest point of the windscreen that is swept by a windscreen wiper;

(b)the upper 10% of the windscreen.



(4) Glazing used in a window or interior partition of a motor vehicle must have a luminous transmittance of at least 70%.



(5) Glazing behind the rear of the driver's seat may be coated to achieve a luminous transmittance of not less than 35%.



(6) Glazing in a side window forward of the rear of the driver's seat may be coated to achieve a luminous transmittance of not less than 70% or, if another law of this jurisdiction allows a lesser luminous transmittance, the greater of:



(a) the lesser luminous transmittance allowed under the other law; and

(b) 35%.



(7) Glazing that has been coated to reduce its luminous transmittance must not have a reflectance of over 10%.



(8) The luminous transmittance requirements in subrules (5) and (6) apply to a vehicle instead of the corresponding requirements in the relevant ADR.



(9) In this rule:



"glazing" means material fitted to the front, sides, rear or interior of a vehicle, through which the driver can see the road, but does not include a coating added after manufacture of the material.



"luminous transmittance", for glazing, means the amount of light that can pass through the glazing as a percentage of the amount of light that would be transmitted if the glazing were absent.

P1E Mentor

P1E

Posted
  • Author
Posted

That's stupid.

Maybe I'll get 20% all over and just remove the driver/passenger tints when I get defected. What does it cost to re-tint just these two windows? Am I right in thinking that Regency don't really check the rear windows?

If Regency ping you for tinting, do they send you home or allow you to rip it off on the spot and still pass?

predator Grand Master

predator

Posted
Posted

guess the rest of the country must be driving around dangerously.. except for S.A.

as pretty much everywhere i know you can tint any of the windows except the front windscreen ..

why do you have such ****ed laws? why? why?? i thought S.A. was a laid back and easy going place. Why do you have laws that are more strict than anywhere else in the country? :bs!:

MADGT4 Mentor

MADGT4

Posted
Posted

My mate has super tint on his 33, i mean on the back streets at night, like poorly lit street's you can hardly see out em....

Also i don't think regency will let you rip it off on the spot.....

I know plenty of people that have failed from window tint, you well get the big ol fail!

Then another trip back so they get more money and the possibility of a diff instructor so you could get raped again.

Cubes Grand Master

Cubes

Posted
Posted

You must also have the little sticker on the window stating its transparency.

Even if the window tint is legal they will make you rip it off without that sticker. (This is what regency recently told me when I went though a big list of what I can and can't do)

Mine doesn't have the sticker.

The only car I've seen have those little stickers is my old mans old 80series Landcruiser and his new Nissan Patrol.

The Landcruiser was tinted from Toyota when they bought it.

The Patrol was tinted by Nissan.

I have approx 35% all round and its perfect.

At night I can see out of it perfectly. No reflections from interior lights etc.

My previous VS commodore was also tinted, for some reason interior lights would reflect and make it difficult to see out.

That tint was lighter than what I have on the line.

I put tint not to look 'cool' but so I don't feel like the sun is ripping apart my face on the drive home from work in peak hour traffic.

Nozila Grand Master

Nozila

Posted
Posted

Front passanger and driver is defectable that is a fact. My installer emphasised this when i got my tint done but think about it, whats the point of getting window tint only on the back and rear quarters?. I use to wind down my front windows whenever i see the cops but now i dont care and even though ive seen them drive near me a few times, nothing has happened. Touch wood.

  • 2 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Latest Posts

    • Chupapy
      Help! Leak coming under transmission

      By Chupapy · Posted

      Yes will do mate
    • GTSBoy
      Help! Leak coming under transmission

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Get an inspection camera up there. 
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Yeah, but look at the margin in viscosity between the 40 and the 60 at 125°C. It is not very large. It is the difference between 7 and 11 cP. Compare that to the viscosity at only 90°C. The viscosity axis is logarithmic. The numbers at 90 are ~15 and ~35. That is about half for the 40 wt oil and <half for the 60. You give up viscosity EXPONENTIALLY as temperature rises. Literally. That is why I declare thicker oil to be a bandaid, and a brittle one at that. Keep the oil temperature under about 110°C and you should be better off.   Having said all of that, which remains true as a general principle, if you have indeed lost enough oil from the sump that the pump was seeing slightly aerated oil, then all bets are off. That would of course cause oil pressure to collapse. And 35 psi is a collapse given what you were doing to the engine. Especially if the oil was that hot and viscosity had also collapsed. And I would put money on rod or main bearings being the source of the any noise that registered as knock. Hydraulic lifters should be able to cope with the hotter oil and lower pressure enough to prvent too much high frequency noise, although I am willing to admit it could be the source.
    • Chupapy
      Help! Leak coming under transmission

      By Chupapy · Posted

      Thanks for the reply mate. Well I really hope its a hose then not engine out job
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      But.... the reason I want to run a 60 weight is so at 125C it has the same viscosity as a 40 weight at 100C. That's the whole reason. If the viscosity changes that much to drop oil pressure from 73psi to 36psi then that's another reason I should be running an oil that mimics the 40 weight at 100C. I have datalogs from the dyno with the oil pressure hitting 73psi at full throttle/high RPM. At the dyno the oil temp was around 100-105C. The pump has a 70psi internal relief spring. It will never go/can't go above 70psi. The GM recommendation of 6psi per 1000rpm is well under that... The oil sensor for logging in LS's is at the valley plate at the back of  the block/rear of where the heads are near the firewall. It's also where the knock sensors are which are notable for 'false knock'. I'm hoping I just didn't have enough oil up top causing some chatter instead of rods being sad (big hopium/copium I know) LS's definitely heat up the oil more than RB's do, the stock vettes for example will hit 300F(150C) in a lap or two and happily track for years and years. This is the same oil cooler that I had when I was in RB land, being the Setrab 25 row oil cooler HEL thing. I did think about putting a fan in there to pull air out more, though I don't know if that will actually help in huge load situations with lots of speed. I think when I had the auto cooler. The leak is where the block runs to the oil cooler lines, the OEM/Dash oil pressure sender is connected at that junction and is what broke. I'm actually quite curious to see how much oil in total capacity is actually left in the engine. As it currently stands I'm waiting on that bush to adapt the sender to it. The sump is still full (?) of oil and the lines and accusump have been drained, but the filter and block are off. I suspect there's maybe less than 1/2 the total capacity there should be in there. I have noticed in the past that topping up oil has improved oil pressure, as reported by the dash sensor. This is all extremely sketchy hence wanting to get it sorted out lol.
×
×
  • Create New...