Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

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

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.

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

: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.

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?

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!:

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.

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.

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


  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah this confirms what I was thinking. Volks are worth a crap load more than my M Sport 17s and 2500 is nuts!  240 is crazy cheap, was this 20 years ago? I have a fairly good air compressor so I'm tempted to get an eBay sand blaster. 
    • I got a quote to restore a set of Volk racing gtc wheels at a wheel restoration shop which involved repainting the centres fixing some small gutter rash and repolishing them and the quote was $2.5k I ended up getting them sandblasted and powdercoated for $240  
    • Nismo 300km/h speedo for R33 gtst in GTR cluster.
    • Has anybody had their wheels refurbished? I reckon it's likely bloody expensive. Even a sand blasting quote for my 17s was 200-300 per wheel! The E39 wheels are basic BMW M Sport (or M Tech at the time.) they have slight rash and some have signs of bad repair in the past on the lips. The main issue is that they've become really off coloured.  I think it will be too much as this is definitely (supposed to be) a budget resto. I've been looking at others for sale but they all have some minor damage and colour issues.  In the end I think I'll just need to sand blast them myself and do a respray.  
    • Trying to figure out which nismo cluster i have. All the ones i see on the internet, the speedo goes up to 320kph and the revs 11k, with the nismo logo being on the rev gauge only. But on my one, the speedo goes up to 300 and says nismo, while the revs only go upto 10k and no nismo logo Dunno how to embed pics into a post so ill attach pic of my cluster and generic google search for reference Is what i have genuine?
×
×
  • Create New...