dino1now Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 Just popped over from the RX8 owners club with something you might be interested in. I had my rear lights tinted and a mate of mine with a 350z had his done too. Thought you would like to see them. First my RX8. And my mates 350z. They are fully road legal, according to the guy who does them and work out at £125 + one way postage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coldel Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 Not wanting to hijack the thread...but I did my lights front and back for £25! Fly-eyes do a wrap for it which is road legal works a treat, takes about five to ten minutes to wrap each light. Front done... Back done...not quite as dark as the ones on the first post but dark enough to take the red away from the colour of the car me thinks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manphibian Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 I used to like tinted lights on Saxo's when i was 17 I grew up tho Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slimjim Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 I used to like tinted lights on Saxo's when i was 17 I grew up tho +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coldel Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 I used to like tinted lights on Saxo's when i was 17 I grew up tho Men never grow up when it comes to cars, they will always be kids in an adults body. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ekona Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 Whether they're road legal or not (and I'd love to see the tests the guys do when fitting the film to ensure they are legal), reducing the amount of light given from the lights just seems a really daft thing to do when most of us complain about how poor headlights are and wanting to be seen on the roads at night. Granted they look more aesthetically pleasing and pop them on for a static show, but making yourself harder to see or reducing your own vision just seems very counter-productive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coldel Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 Whether they're road legal or not (and I'd love to see the tests the guys do when fitting the film to ensure they are legal), reducing the amount of light given from the lights just seems a really daft thing to do when most of us complain about how poor headlights are and wanting to be seen on the roads at night. Granted they look more aesthetically pleasing and pop them on for a static show, but making yourself harder to see or reducing your own vision just seems very counter-productive. That's true. Although I haven't heard anyone say that 'headlights are poor' before? I certainly can see pretty much any car at night with its headlights on... ...actually the most annoying thing at night is the daft twonk driving around with very bright headlights (and not just because they left the main beam on) which dazzle other drivers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ekona Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 Pre-facelift Zed lights aren't that hot, post-facelift are significantly better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slimjim Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 I do think the Fly-eyes are legal, because they let enough light through... due to them being lots of little holes, rather than a solid film. and I also think they look OK... (for shows) But then again I completely agree with Ekona about the visibility issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coldel Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 Yeah the flyeyes let solid light through at the level it is projected, but there is less of it. I would guess it would be better to put in some better bulbs/LEDs or whatever to compensate. Although that said, is it lack of light that causes accidents or just rubbish driving. I always tend to find its the latter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slimjim Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 Although that said, is it lack of light that causes accidents or just rubbish driving. I always tend to find its the latter I find the former is a result of the latter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coldel Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 I wouldn't agree, maybe sometimes, but Mr BMW with his blaring headlights tonning it down the inside lane of the M25 last night certainly wasn't going to benefit from brighter headlights...in fact here is a hypothesis to ponder, having brighter headlights makes a driver over confident, hence more likely to speed, hence more likely to have an accident Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glrnet Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 +1, going to try and adjust mine a bit this week, they are a bit too low for my liking but certainly don't want them shining on the ears of the guy in front, somebody posted a nice little guide for this not long ago, hopefully we'll get a nice dry evening later in the week Pre-facelift Zed lights aren't that hot, post-facelift are significantly better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M13KYF Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 extremely dangerous tinting pre facelift rear lights. They just arent bright enough. Seen it done before on the zed and many found it dangerous following the Zed in question Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.