99blancoSS

iTrader: (115)

Whatchyall think of this. As long as the tailights and brake lights can been seen at 500 feet its legal. the reflectors are exposed and the resat would be smoked

Poik

I think it actually looks pretty good. You get a gold star for creativity!

99blancoSS

iTrader: (115)

I'll be honest the more I see them on the car the more I likey

WAHUSKER

iTrader: (4)

Looks evil, that's for sure. As for legal, I had a cop harass me over my factory Dodge taillight covers on my Dakota. He said "....anything that obscures any part of the light is illegal....". So if what you say is an actual code, I'd print out a copy & keep it in the car.

99blancoSS

iTrader: (115)

Well you pro'lly had your reflectors covered. The code is clearly written that 500 feet is the factor and the reflectors have to be seen for 500 feet. I'll ask my local PD for an interpretation and the dmv is a half mile from me as well.
I'll use night shades for the final product thats just black construction paper and black tape right now. As long as I have the lighting right I think its legal. Wheres rott? Isn't he an ex po po

CHarris

iTrader: (5)

Maybe try 2 THIN coats of niteshade over the lit portion and a single SUPER THIN coat over the reflector? It would make the whole light look darker (more of a smoked look) but shouldn't hurt the reflector too badly. I did my front corner markers on my last truck and it looked good and left the lights plenty bright.

You could also get crazy and take the light apart and do the inside of the lens. I did that on my old 69 mustang. Looked very good and kept the red outside but only over the actual parts that stuck out on the housing. Made three nice vertical slashes rather than a big red blob at night.

Poik

Don't know if you know this, but the cops don't exactly go by the RCW, they have like "spark-notes" for the RCW and they'll write you a ticket if you break the law according to their cheat sheet, not necessarily if you actually are in accordance with the RCW or not.

99blancoSS

iTrader: (115)

I've known that ever since a cop told me "no, thats your interpretation of the law" and wrote me a ticket. I'll go to the DMV and have them give the yea or nay. IF they give me a yea I'll ask for an official clearance letter or something. If your in accordance with the law then fek em. I found good tail lights for $90 shipped so I have a fall back. I can also try using window tint and then call the cops and have them inspect it or take it to the dmv before painting them

Layn_Low_247

iTrader: (1)

Tape them up w/ Masking tape and put SS on both lens instead.

Rottluver

iTrader: (3)

Mark, IIRC he is talking about Oregon laws which more then likely differ from WA laws. Which also differ from Cali laws so I can't help ya out Blanco. Sorry.

Poik, as for the "cheat sheets" (at least the ones we got in Cali) were printed by the DMV and were just condensed versions of the "real" Vehicle Code. I would presume that the ones up this way are as well. Doesn't mean guys won't make mistakes or misunderstand some of them, but that happens with the full version of the Vehicle Codes as well.

Rokko

iTrader: (2)

They'll write you a ****** ticket if you don't break the law. For the most part it's a buncha Buford T. Justice redneck jackass oinkers around here.

Poik

Oh yeah forgot that he was in Portland, that might play a minor role in which laws apply

From my personal experience I feel that "condensed" is an understatement. I don't exactly remember what the RCW I was looking at was, but when I was sitting in the back of a police car when I was 15 after being slammed on a car and searched for not providing ID since I didn't have any on me for hanging out across the street from my house one night, on the cop's laptop it had some RCW summed up in 2-3 sentences. Whew, runon sentence.. Anyways, I know the purpose is to speed things up, but I think lots of the meaning gets lost in the translation/condensation of the code.

Poik

Oh trust me I know, and then they slap you with a public defender who fights for them. I'm out $600 and neg 2 on my record for not breaking the law.

Rottluver

iTrader: (3)

Don't hold back, tell us how ya realy feel.

KrautBurner

iTrader: (5)

here's what mine were

this was my 94 Z28



and it just wouldn't be right to show any part of this car without showing the front end

KrautBurner

iTrader: (5)

nobody ever had any issues with my tail lights (except them getting smaller)

Nate_Taufer

iTrader: (1)

Those are rice man.

howierd42

Dude, what Integra did you steal those from?

Blanco, that is a good idea and something I had been thinking about myself. If not that, then just putting a thin piece of reflective tape on the bottom black outs themselves. Let us know what the outcome at the DMV is. I imagine there would not be too much difference between this liberal state and that one.

99blancoSS

iTrader: (115)

Sure will. I think I'll buy that set of tailights and use them so I have a good set just in case its a no at the DMV