View Full Version : how dark is factory tint?


goldenarches69
03-14-2005, 09:08 PM
hi i just wanted to know what percent would the factory tint is? it looks like a 20 but it could be a 35. i dunno im blind. Would you guys go darker or do u like the shade that it is .
thanks
kevin

speakerboxxx
03-14-2005, 09:37 PM
bout 35

squareone
03-14-2005, 09:46 PM
about 22

grnxb
03-14-2005, 09:52 PM
I don't know, but I'll bet it's somewhere between 22 and 35.

squareone
03-14-2005, 09:52 PM
call the damn dealer.

Max
03-15-2005, 02:02 AM
pm windowtint, he'll tell you 19-20%

Rion
03-15-2005, 02:08 AM
The lower the percentage the darker the tint. I suspect it's closer to 35 or even 50 in the back. 20% isn't even legal in some states.

Lonely_Raven
03-15-2005, 02:10 AM
I totally remember reading 35% passthough somewhere, but then again this is the
internet and I could have just been reading someones opinion.

sexyscionlover
03-15-2005, 02:13 AM
mine got rated by the meter and is at 22. its illegal in NE but oh well. its a damn fine match IMO

KapitanE
03-15-2005, 02:14 AM
My factory tint, it is original JDM, i.e. not tinted by film, but tinted glass, is between 24 and 25%. This was measure with a kind of meter at a government testing facility when I got my car registered. It is a requirement here.

windowtint
03-15-2005, 02:18 AM
pm windowtint, he'll tell you 19-20%

19-20%

The lower the percentage the darker the tint. I suspect it's closer to 35 or even 50 in the back. 20% isn't even legal in some states.

it's federal law that mandates OEM 'tinting'. Federal law always supercedes state laws. If the Feds say it's ok and the state says it's not, you ignore the state and do what the feds say.

If a state outlaws tint that's 20% in darkness - they are regulating the APPLICATION OF ADDITIONAL AFTERMARKET TINTING. The law is not applicable to the OEM colored glass.

yournightmare
03-15-2005, 04:15 PM
" Federal law always supercedes state laws. If the Feds say it's ok and the state says it's not, you ignore the state and do what the feds say."

--I just wanted to point out that the above statements are not entirely correct. Each level of government is able to pass more restrictive laws than those enacted by higher levels of government. For example, the Federal government says alcohol is OK to sell, but many counties and cities are dry. But states cannot pass laws that are less restrictive than Federal law. In that case, Federal law supercedes state law. For example, the medical marijuana laws passed in California, Oregon, etc.

xbox83
03-15-2005, 05:07 PM
i've heard that 27% matches almost dead on and that was from a dealer who's demo has tinted windows

-X

ugly_duck
03-15-2005, 05:58 PM
im doing 35%. It wont match but i wont get a ticket either. I think its aroun 20%, its legal in MOST states

windowtint
03-16-2005, 01:38 AM
" Federal law always supercedes state laws. If the Feds say it's ok and the state says it's not, you ignore the state and do what the feds say."

--I just wanted to point out that the above statements are not entirely correct. Each level of government is able to pass more restrictive laws than those enacted by higher levels of government. For example, the Federal government says alcohol is OK to sell, but many counties and cities are dry. But states cannot pass laws that are less restrictive than Federal law. In that case, Federal law supercedes state law. For example, the medical marijuana laws passed in California, Oregon, etc.

thanks for going OT ... that's always nice. Now I know there are always many dying to make me look stupid ... but it's harder than that. As far as states/feds go. Feds ALWAYS have the final word one way or another - if a state enacts a tougher law, it's under the approval of feds. Implicitly or otherwise. I live in the south, I am plenty familiar with blue laws (alcohol to the unitiated). As far as the medical marijuana issue, those two states have also been threatened to be castrated (per se) by the FedGov if they follow through with the law. It's been made abundantly clear they may lose ALL non-essential federal funding (roads.. pork projects... higher education above K-12, etc) - that's a death sentence for a state. So sure, a state can do the opposite of what the feds want them to - but it will cost them dearly.

Scion05BOPxB
03-16-2005, 02:54 AM
From what I've heard/read somewhere, the tint is equivalent to 3M RM22... which I assume to be 22%, but I'm not sure.

Big_Jim
03-16-2005, 03:12 AM
this pic shows that 35% is almost a match on camo green.
http://www.teamscionrg.com/Gallery/albums/images/images/exposedphilly/normal_IMG_0003%20%28Medium%29.JPG

but on another color, it looks too light.

alot of tint shops around me use a 30% tint to match alot of the factory tints, and imo, it matches up pretty well.

i'd stick around 25-35% tint to make it match the best.

good luck
Jim

yournightmare
03-16-2005, 07:32 AM
" Federal law always supercedes state laws. If the Feds say it's ok and the state says it's not, you ignore the state and do what the feds say."

--I just wanted to point out that the above statements are not entirely correct. Each level of government is able to pass more restrictive laws than those enacted by higher levels of government. For example, the Federal government says alcohol is OK to sell, but many counties and cities are dry. But states cannot pass laws that are less restrictive than Federal law. In that case, Federal law supercedes state law. For example, the medical marijuana laws passed in California, Oregon, etc.

thanks for going OT ... that's always nice. Now I know there are always many dying to make me look stupid ... but it's harder than that. As far as states/feds go. Feds ALWAYS have the final word one way or another - if a state enacts a tougher law, it's under the approval of feds. Implicitly or otherwise. I live in the south, I am plenty familiar with blue laws (alcohol to the unitiated). As far as the medical marijuana issue, those two states have also been threatened to be castrated (per se) by the FedGov if they follow through with the law. It's been made abundantly clear they may lose ALL non-essential federal funding (roads.. pork projects... higher education above K-12, etc) - that's a death sentence for a state. So sure, a state can do the opposite of what the feds want them to - but it will cost them dearly.

Uhh, what's the problem? Who's talking about States doing the opposite of what the Feds want them to do? And thanks for inadvertently (?) agreeing with me, starting with sentence 7 of your post.

BTW, my post wasn't OT. YOU made the post saying State law didn't have any say in the darkness of OEM window tint. People need to know that your information was incorrect so that they aren't surprised when they get a ticket.

I'd really like to take more time to explain federalism, the Constitution, and the rights of States to pass laws, but I have things to do.