mx5cartalk.com

I think this may be the solution:

http://ravenwingperformance.homestead.c ... hades.html

so who wants to try them first?

it says for use on tail lights, not too sure about head lights but worth a shot if you have a pair lying around to experiment with

Do not do this to your headlights.

It's bad enough on your tailights. We have one post with guys putting illegal and blinding HID's in housings not designed for them and another post telling people to reduce their light output by illegally tinting their headilghts.

I must be too old.

Garry wrote:I must be too old.

Garry wrote:Do not do this to your headlights.

Depends on the application? If you're literally only going to do it to the silver bits in between the lens/lights/etc, much as the SE has it, then is it still illegal?

marcusus wrote:

Garry wrote:Do not do this to your headlights.

Depends on the application? If you're literally only going to do it to the silver bits in between the lens/lights/etc, much as the SE has it, then is it still illegal?

pretty much, you aren't supposed to modify your headlights/taillights outside manufacturers specs for your model, end of story.

garry is right.

i've lost count of the amount of times i've been coming home in the truck at night & been blinded by some f&*kwit who thinks he's doing a helluva good job installing HID's so HE can see, without giving a skerrick of a thought for anyone around him/her.

i've also seen the idiot who thinks it's WAY cool to tint his taillights wondering why someone nearly ran up his clacker because his rear lights are so dim you can't see them ten feet away.

So in that case, are the SE's headlights actually tinted? Or is it just the silver bits inside the casing that don't get 'reflected on' (for lack of a better term) that are tinted?

That's what it looks like to me anyway, but I don't usually look at SE's headlights when I see them

I'm with Garry and AJ on this one. It is not just about being legal, to me it is also about common sense.....if you tint your tail lights (and/or headlights) then surely you will reduce the ligth output...which cannot be a good thing. I have travelled behind various cars with tinted tail lights. I had difficulty telling if the braked lights or indicators were on, which reduces the amount of time I have to react to them braking or turning.

Yes, I know it sounds like I am against anything new or different......but hey sometimes things were designed a particular way for a good reason.

Just my 2.2c (GST inclusive).

J

marcusus wrote:

Garry wrote:Do not do this to your headlights.

Depends on the application? If you're literally only going to do it to the silver bits in between the lens/lights/etc, much as the SE has it, then is it still illegal?

as far as i know yes

Juffa wrote:I'm with Garry and AJ on this one. It is not just about being legal, to me it is also about common sense.....if you tint your tail lights (and/or headlights) then surely you will reduce the ligth output...which cannot be a good thing. I have travelled behind various cars with tinted tail lights. I had difficulty telling if the braked lights or indicators were on, which reduces the amount of time I have to react to them braking or turning.

i was very close to running up someones rear because there car had blinking brake lights as indicators

and yet i can't believe it was legal

why is it legal because it was one of those old school type cars i think before 197 something its legal to have blinking brake lights instead of what is on cars now days blinking orange

AZNTieN wrote:i was very close to running up someones rear because there car had blinking brake lights as indicators

and yet i can't believe it was legal

why is it legal because it was one of those old school type cars i think before 197 something its legal to have blinking brake lights instead of what is on cars now days blinking orange

I think that's also a US thing, where they have blinking brakes as indicators?

AZNTieN wrote:

marcusus wrote:

Garry wrote:Do not do this to your headlights.

Depends on the application? If you're literally only going to do it to the silver bits in between the lens/lights/etc, much as the SE has it, then is it still illegal?

as far as i know yes

I think you guys are confused

if you spray this stuff on your lights = illegal
if you pull globes out and spray in = illegal
if you seperate the perspex outer shell from headlight assembly assuming you tape up all the reflectors (so they still reflect) it will be = legal

i did it to a pair of altezza tail lights (painted the chrome black)
(i then tinted them but they were for show)

headlights can be done quite easily alot of the R33 boys do it to their lights in the same manor
ill see if I can find some pics

Ryan.

not only did i find pics! here are instructions!

http://www.altezzaclub.org.au/files/Pai ... lights.pdf

Disclaimer: You do this at your own peril
I only led to water didn't make you drink it

fwiw this is a bling mod and when done properly will add to the look of the car

word of warning it takes alot of patience and a keen hand with the hair dryer
to much you'll melt the light
not enough you risk cracking the light cover as its to cold

Ryan.

sabretooth wrote:

AZNTieN wrote:i was very close to running up someones rear because there car had blinking brake lights as indicators

and yet i can't believe it was legal

why is it legal because it was one of those old school type cars i think before 197 something its legal to have blinking brake lights instead of what is on cars now days blinking orange

I think that's also a US thing, where they have blinking brakes as indicators?

yep, & they've had it for donkeys years too

lowmiata wrote:if you seperate the perspex outer shell from headlight assembly assuming you tape up all the reflectors (so they still reflect) it will be = legal

That's what I was trying to get at. You aren't spraying the actual reflecty bits, but rather the other silver bits that are just in the headlight compartment that don't actually do any reflecting.

Either way, I won't be doing this because it's more effort than it's worth. Was more curious to know legalities more than anything else.

It's all about \"the look\" guys.
Remember in the mid-late 90's most of the cars from Europe had darkish lenses?
People just want to mimic it as this spray-on-smoke stuff was never around until then. \"Imitation is the most sincere form of flattery\"

Other examples:
- late 90's a lot of cars had indicator lenses that were not amber, now they are again.
- \"Altezza\" (Lexus IS200) 'clear' tailights as aforementioned
- single, upright windscreen wipers like the mid 90's Bristish touring cars

It's all about \"the look\", form over function