One Way Glass

Would it be legal to fit a sheet of reflective film to the side window of a truck?I was at the office recently and noticed that they have reflective film on the door,I thought that I could use some of that to keep that jolly nice Angus Nairn at bay.He could come galoping along in our souped up unit and get a nice view of himself.

‘‘Vehicles first used on 1 April 1985 or later
The front windscreen must let at least 75% of light through and the front side windows must let at least 70% of light through.’’

That’s the law on window films/tints. I believe the police also have some sort of device that can measure the light that comes through your window at the roadside. So i reckon even if it is legal you would get stopped a lot!

 "Under regulations first issued 20 years ago and clarified three years ago, the windscreen must allow in at least 75 per cent of light while at least 70 per cent must pass through the driver’s side windows"The Highway Code - "You MUST NOT use a vehicle with excessively dark tinting applied to the windsceen, or to the glass in any front window to either side of the driver. Window tinting applied during manufacture complies with the Visual Light Transmittance (VLT) standards.

gov.uk/…/tinted-windows-gu….

70% light transmission through side glass, and yes police and DVSA do have light meters with Immediate prohibition
for offending vehicles.

No. Your side windows must allow at least 70% of the light through (75% for windscreens). Clear glass in windscreen thickness only transmits about 85%, factory tinted glass even less. Any extra tinted/reflective film you apply is going to reduce this to way below the 70% allowed, resulting in Angus having yet another stick with which to beat you :slight_smile:

Don’t bother, there’s nothing on earth that makes the Filth more likely to pull you than tinted windows.

Now I understand about light meters and letting in 70% of ambient light but this is an interesting question.
Reflective tints can still allow 70% of light through so would be legal by definition. Just imagine how hard pulling out of junctions would be if you couldn’t see through the windows on other vehicles.

Like this:

m1cks:
Now I understand about light meters and letting in 70% of ambient light but this is an interesting question.
Reflective tints can still allow 70% of light through so would be legal by definition.

The light passed through by reflective tinted film on its own might (just) be legal - but when added to the glass (even “clear” glass blocks around 15% of the light, and most vehicle body glass these days is already tinted, so will block even more) it will almost certainly be well below what is legally permitted.

alamcculloch:
that jolly nice Angus Nairn

Jolly baldy ■■■■■■…

.

Yes you can use reflective film. There’s no problem with the rear side and back windows, you could paint them solid as long as you had functioning rear view mirrors on each side of the vehicle. The problem is with the front side windows and windscreen. The hardest part is finding a reflective film that lets enough light through.

As Roymondo said though, glass is already tinted which makes it harder.

What might you be doing that you won’t want Angus seeing■■? :grimacing:

It would be good to get a reflective tint that let light the right amount through. Not for any particular reason , other than to confuse the camera wielding chap in the truck.

bazza123:
It would be good to get a reflective tint that let light the right amount through. Not for any particular reason , other than to confuse the camera wielding chap in the truck.

If it allows 70%+ of light through, it won’t be reflective (not enough to stop anyone seeing inside at any rate).

If it’s just to pi$$ off the Agnes nairn type people that stalk us drivers on a daily basis, then you would be better off with a pop up sign with the words “focker offski you perv” or similar wording on it , maybe a bit extreme, but could you just imagine if they had the documentary film crew in the cab filming, (ok i know they dare not show it on tv) but it would certainly pi$$ them off a tad