Avant privacy glass

Status
Not open for further replies.
ajax1976

ajax1976

Registered User
Joined
Oct 23, 2012
Messages
1,337
Reaction score
723
Points
113
Location
Fife, Scotland
Anyone have any idea what percentage of tint Audi privacy glass is? Thinking of getting the front sides done but want to stay the right side of the law!!

 
  • Like
Reactions: martynash, Big Al, Brennan and 1 other person
I'm thinking to do the same but I think the rear tint is defenetly not legal only allowed a 35% tint in the front I think, also could I ask what kind of alloys is that you have ? They look really good
 
As an MOT Tester, I would fail the car if front windows were tinted more than 20% (or standard from factory) rear window (tailgate) doesn't matter as long as you have 2 wing/door mirrors like a van. Police view this differently as they do with tyres so don't over do it


Regards

Marty :blackrs4:
 
martynash said:
As an MOT Tester, I would fail the car if front windows were tinted more than 20% (or standard from factory) rear window (tailgate) doesn't matter as long as you have 2 wing/door mirrors like a van. Police view this differently as they do with tyres so don't over do it


Regards

Marty :blackrs4:
Click to expand...


Marty,

Surely, you are not entitled do fail a vehicle for this reason as tinted windows are not part of the MOT test??
 
Drivers view is. I can fail you for having your Sat Nav in the centre of the screen if it obscures the view of the road or the road to the side, hence why you shouldn't tint front widows past manufacturers specs.

I can also legally pass a tyre with raised tread and bald edges and you go down the road and five minutes later the Police nick you and give you 3 points and a fine. MOT Law is one thing Police Law is another, so be careful out there!

I wouldn't fail a car for the Sat Nav or windows unless they were taking the p**s but I could.

Just goes to show though, the laws of motoring are strange and contradictory now and again

Regards

Marty:blackrs4:
 
Last edited:
What percentage are your rear ones? Looks mint especially with the wheels!

ajax1976 said:
Anyone have any idea what percentage of tint Audi privacy glass is? Thinking of getting the front sides done but want to stay the right side of the law!!

Click to expand...
 
I do really like the A4 in this red, really does look just right, it's the color i wanted my special edition in but cound'nt find one so had to go with brilliant black.

really nice sir.
What are the wheels , i may want to change my DTM's and these look right.
rob
 
If you go to a decent tinting place they should know how dark the rears are and match it up. But like everyone else is saying it will be too dark but i doubt you will get pulled for it
 
This is the wording of the MOT manual regarding window tinting

"Additional opaque films are subject to Reason for Rejection whether fitted on the inside or outside of the windscreen or front side windows."

It would be a shame to spend a lot of money having the tints for the car to then fail the MOT or have the Police nick you. So be careful how far you go with tinting windows..


Marty:blackrs4:
 
I think I'll go to a tinters and see if they can get as close to the rears but staying legal, it's the contrast between the front and rear that annoys me the most. It's the main reason I've never had tints done before but as this car came with the privacy glass I'm stuck with it and now I can actually see the benefits of having tints. The MOT side of things doesn't bother me too much as my local guy does use an element of common sense and is quite fair with me. I do find it hard to believe the fronts are close to or on the limit already tho.

Wheels are Team Dynamics Imola and might be for sale shortly;-)
 
Just did my wife's Lupo which I'm now trundling around in. 80% rear quarter & tailgate, 50% front driver & passenger £90 all in (Central Window Tints, Birmingham).

Yes, they said the same regards the front, but only the Police check, MOT stations are not required to?

https://www.gov.uk/tinted-vehicle-window-rules

"Tinted windows are not part of the MOT test."
 
I have only been an MOT Tester for 30 years or so, so what do I know?
But as we are helping people here and not just making a counter point. The MOT manual written by VOSA ( Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA) clearly states : -

"Additional opaque films are subject to Reason for Rejection whether fitted on the inside or outside of the windscreen or front side windows."

It's up to you whether you take the chance but it would be a shame to rip it all off if you're caught either way!

Regards

Marty :blackrs4:


"Tinted windows are part of the MOT test."
 
Last edited:
Got any pics of your Lupo Al so I can see the difference between the front and rear?

Bit extreme tinting the windows just so no one will see you driving a Lupo now tho is it not?!? ;-)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Al and Brennan
Sure, just taken these! Marty I don't know why the Gov website says that then, I only just read it! Looks like they need to revise their website.... I think the Lupo rear glass is the same 80% tint as the avant. The Lupo serves as a runaround now my A4 is knackered! So I had the windows tinted to keep the car cool for my son. I never got that far with the A4, kept repairing it! Though it's off to see Craig very soon! :friends:

2014-08-02-7606_zps9b0623d0.jpg

2014-08-02-7609_zpscccddf66.jpg

2014-08-02-7608_zps0920be56.jpg


Looking a little sad for itself
2014-08-02-7611_zps1c10f976.jpg
 
Hi Al

No Problem.

Lupo looks great.

I don't think they are too dark. I certainly wouldn't fail it. You can see right through the car. Its when its so dark that you can't see at night. Then that's just plain dangerous coz you can't see what's coming from the left or right. I'm sure you understand and have seen it yourself.
Shame I'm not in Birmingham, I would go and get mine done now for that money.

What's up with the A4 engine?

Cheers

Marty :blackrs4:
 
almost any tint on the front will take it over
the tint company will just take your cash an do them.

but rember its 3 points a side and a fine.
 
I know Bez, but it's so much cooler with them fitted. So it's a risk I'm prepared to take. No air con with this car either. The Lupo front windows are huge and without the tints my right arm was burning in the sunshine and the car was really hot inside. It's better at night too, as the door mirrors don't have anti-dazzle glass (being non Sport or GTI), so the tint helps reduce headlight glare. The A4 glass seems both thicker and more green tinted than the Lupo, so it would make it a little darker I suppose.That car has plain glass mirrors too (now heated but anti-dazzle was stupid expensive option).

Cheeky of me to say though mate, your avatar picture gives me the creeps, I see it all the time on here as you're a common poster, any chance of a happier picture?! A sexy lady, or even a joke one like mine! ;o)

Marty, I have no idea other than possible rod bearing failure as loud knocking noise, Craig is due to have my car up soon for engine out checkover. Here's my thread with video -

http://www.audi-sport.net/vb/audi-s...222862-help-2-0-tfsi-bgb-engine-knocking.html
 
Last edited:
any better ?
 
yeah that's shows the real me
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Al
Gotta say that Lupo looks :rock: but the law is pretty clear, if the glass is marked "AS2" the maximum permissible tint is already in the glass for front windows...

so really depends on if you're willing to take the risk with coming across a police type with a rod up his *** ;)
 
martynash said:
As an MOT Tester, I would fail the car if front windows were tinted more than 20%
Click to expand...

What equipment do you have to check this?

As has been said, standard glass (yes, even the 'clear' stuff) comes with a level of tint these days which is fairly close to the legal limit out the factory.

We used to be quite involved with police awareness days on this kinda thing - i'm sure at one stage there were even standard cars which failed the tintman test.

One things for sure - you'll not get even close to matching the rears on your car and still be legal AJ.

Its one of those things though, you could tint your fronts and drive for 10 years with no bother...... or you could tint them and get a tug hours later.
 
ESD1711 said:
What equipment do you have to check this?

As has been said, standard glass (yes, even the 'clear' stuff) comes with a level of tint these days which is fairly close to the legal limit out the factory.

We used to be quite involved with police awareness days on this kinda thing - i'm sure at one stage there were even standard cars which failed the tintman test.



One things for sure - you'll not get even close to matching the rears on your car and still be legal AJ.

Its one of those things though, you could tint your fronts and drive for 10 years with no bother...... or you could tint them and get a tug hours later.
Click to expand...

The equipment I have is eyes, good and fair judgement and 30 years experience as an MOT Tester, along with regular refresher courses with VOSA ( Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA) and accurate use of the MOT Manual (as quoted from previously). The last refresher being December 2013.

You are right though. You may never be caught, you may be caught today. You may be stopped for nothing more than a routine check but then find they go through the car with a fine toothed comb and the tints are the item they charge you with. Also if they are too dark that may be the reason they stopped you in the first place.

My advice for what it's worth is, tint side windows sensibly and leave the front screen alone completely. Tints are there to protect you from the sun. If you tint like a "Gangsta" you will be nicked like one :busted_cop:

Regards

Marty :blackrs4:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Al and jdp1962
Cool, as I thought then - you have no means of confirming whether a tint is 20 or 25 other than judgement.....

All the years of experience and refresher courses wont change that - you have no means of proving the amount of light passing through a window.

And that's the problem with so many MOT related issues - its very much a matter of opinion on the part of the tester.
 
Out of interest though Marty - for the quote you've lifted from the MOT manual, what is the associated reason for rejection which it refers to?

The most recent manual I can find quotes something similar to what you've state but makes no mention of side windows - only the windscreen. The associated reason for rejection accompanying that relates mainly to damage or things encroaching in to zone A or the swept area....

I'm assuming you've got a more recent manual than the April 2013 one so curious as to how the reason for rejection is worded....?
 
Last edited:
All valid points of course....you pays your money you takes your chance.

I am a freelance MOT tester and travel all over the South West of England at various different garages and regularly look into MOT manuals to check things. The on-line MOT manual does only state windscreen but I have read it in a manual which must be a newer version at some point. Anyway it's common sense, if you can't see out of the sides during the day, what chance do you have of seeing anything through them at night?


Regards


Marty:blackrs4:
 
So basically.... you just made up that quote then aye?

Everything I can find, on .gov, vosa, mot tester websites points to the fact that tints are not part of the MOT Test, and that the regulation you've quoted actually relates to very specific parts of the windscreen as opposed to the side windows.

And to think you're on here criticising folk for dishing out bad info in another thread!!!

Happy to retract this when you quote the actual regulation and associated reason for rejection.
 
ESD1711 said:
So basically.... you just made up that quote then aye?

Everything I can find, on .gov, vosa, mot tester websites points to the fact that tints are not part of the MOT Test, and that the regulation you've quoted actually relates to very specific parts of the windscreen as opposed to the side windows.

And to think you're on here criticising folk for dishing out bad info in another thread!!!

Happy to retract this when you quote the actual regulation and associated reason for rejection.
Click to expand...

As you like

No need to retract..............glad to be stalked. You might learn something mate. I am trying to help people....and you?

Regards


Marty:blackrs4:
 
Stalked cos I noted you popping up in another topic i claiming 'I do love it when people quote things as the truth without actually knowing and I don't mean that in a harsh way but information on here is precious and should be VERY ACCURATE.'?!?!

When in reality you're just making up your own mot rules as you go along. Again, I'll happily take this back when you quote me this regulation you're referring to and its associated Reason for Rejection.

See here for the .gov take on it:
https://www.gov.uk/tinted-vehicle-window-rules
'Tinted windows are not part of the MOT test.'

See here for April 2013 MOT Test Manual extract:
m4s08000301
'Additional opaque films are subject to Reason for Rejection 1 whether fitted on the inside or outside of the windscreen'
Reason For rejection:
1. In Zone ‘A’: a. damage not contained within a 10mm diameter circle, or b. a windscreen sticker or other obstruction encroaching more than 10mm c. a combination of minor damage areas which seriously restricts the driver’s view In the remainder of the swept area: d. damage not contained within a 40mm diameter circle, or e. a windscreen sticker or other obstruction encroaching more than 40mm f. a temporary windscreen fitted. Note: All the items listed in the information column should be taken into account before rejecting a vehicle

See here for VOSA guidance Q&A:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...ent_data/file/245217/tinted-windows-guide.pdf
'Why are tinted windows not included in the MOT test?
Excessively tinted glass is seen as a serious issue but one which currently affects only a small number of the 24 million vehicles
tested annually. To include this item in the MOT test would require all 18,000 garages to incur expenditure on special test equipment
and the time taken to carry out an MOT would increase. The MOT fee would have to be raised to cover the extra time and investment.
This extra cost would affect all motorists - all for a small number of vehicles. With the current levels of offending, roadside enforcement
is a better route as it targets the offenders while minimising the cost and inconvenience to compliant road users.'
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jespy and ajax1976
You are quoting from the GOV website


Here is the section you mention currently on the VOSA (DVSA) website. This maybe an older version too. You can look this up too. It's not only for qualified Testers.


"Original vehicle design characteristics are to be accepted. Additional opaque films are subject to Reason for Rejection 1 whether fitted on the inside or outside of the windscreen. Additional mirrors and tinting films are not subject to Reason for Rejection 1. "

Reason for rejection 1 is the windscreen.



As I am not answerable to you, not to my knowledge anyway, how seriously can I take a guy who wants to remove his car's one and only external lock?

Shall we move on now? or can you not let it be?

Regards


Marty:applaus:
 
Ah..... so still no mention of side windows then.

That'll be me told. Well and truly.

I'll ignore the personal dig.
 
martynash said:
You are quoting from the GOV website


Here is the section you mention currently on the VOSA (DVSA) website. This maybe an older version too. You can look this up too. It's not only for qualified Testers.


"Original vehicle design characteristics are to be accepted. Additional opaque films are subject to Reason for Rejection 1 whether fitted on the inside or outside of the windscreen. Additional mirrors and tinting films are not subject to Reason for Rejection 1. "

Reason for rejection 1 is the windscreen.



As I am not answerable to you, not to my knowledge anyway, how seriously can I take a guy who wants to remove his car's one and only external lock?

Shall we move on now? or can you not let it be?

Regards


Marty:applaus:
Click to expand...


Additional mirrors and tinting films are not subject to Reason for Rejection 1.

Additional mirrors and tinting films are not subject to Reason for Rejection 1.
 
ESD1711 said:
Additional mirrors and tinting films are not subject to Reason for Rejection 1.

Additional mirrors and tinting films are not subject to Reason for Rejection 1.
Click to expand...


........and the answer was I can't let it be

I gotta hand it to you, you can read big writing and everything.

Well done again.:applaus:

The sooner Scotland goes it alone the better by the looks of it.

When you've removed your car's one and only external lock and you can't get in coz your battery is flat, you'll be able to smash the blacked out windows to gain entry and then you'll be able to see out as well as in. Wish I'd thought of that! (I don't really) Der!

Priceless



I feel sorry for Ajax1976 that his post now has the highland hijack. :jester:



Thanks for the entertainment today ESD1711, I've thoroughly enjoyed it. Keep up the unhelpful, rude and intrusive posts. I know, you know, no better. Shame really.



Regards

Marty :yahoo::blackrs4:

As the Rolling Stones once sang "I see a clear window and want to paint it Black" Was it the windscreen or the side window? That's the question.
 
martynash said:
........and the answer was I can't let it be

I gotta hand it to you, you can read big writing and everything.

Well done again.:applaus:

The sooner Scotland goes it alone the better by the looks of it.

When you've removed your car's one and only external lock and you can't get in coz your battery is flat, you'll be able to smash the blacked out windows to gain entry and then you'll be able to see out as well as in. Wish I'd thought of that! (I don't really) Der!

Priceless



I feel sorry for Ajax1976 that his post now has the highland hijack. :jester:



Thanks for the entertainment today ESD1711, I've thoroughly enjoyed it. Keep up the unhelpful, rude and intrusive posts. I know, you know, no better. Shame really.



Regards

Marty :yahoo::blackrs4:

As the Rolling Stones once sang "I see a clear window and want to paint it Black" Was it the windscreen or the side window? That's the question.
Click to expand...

Oh WOW. Where to even begin with that.

Firstly - keeping it on topic, I note that you've totally ignored that not only have you been providing false information throughout the entire thread, you actually proved yourself wrong in your last post. Yet still it's ME being unhelpful?!?

Moving on to the rest of what is a complete abomination if a post - your views on Scotland 'going it alone' speak volumes. Fail to see their relevance mind you, but it's noted none the less.

With regards to the 'highland hijack' - it would appear your knowledge of geography is about as extensive as that of your mot test manual. I'm from Edinburgh. Edinburgh is to the highlands what south west end England is to Newcastle.

Worth boring that AJ is also a scot, and is closer to the highlands than I am.

Unhelpful rude and intrusive posts? I think you'll find mind are at least accurate and backed up with fact. And while we are answering questions - it would appear the answer to your 'how seriously can I take a guy....' Question is - more seriously than someone with eyes, good and fair judgement and 30 years experience as an mot tester with some refresher courses.

Maybe time to book yourself on to another refresher eh Marty.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jespy, martynash and ajax1976
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
Mirror Glass
Replies
4
Views
771
Brooker89
Brooker89
Wrath
Headlight Glass
Replies
0
Views
2K
Wrath
Wrath
Ricky Burrows
B7 Wingmirror Glass?
Replies
16
Views
975
Ricky Burrows
Ricky Burrows
martin1984
wing mirror glass
Replies
10
Views
856
Metalsmurf
Metalsmurf
TOM.S
Headlight lens/glass
Replies
1
Views
642
martin1984
martin1984
Top
Back