Jump to content

anyone know if tinted or "blackout" lens covers are legal?


Gixxus Christ!
 Share

Recommended Posts

As some of you know I took the TL1000 for a slide in a ditch last fall, in the process putting some serious scuffs and scratches on my headlight. At around $150-$170 for a good used one, I'm not super keen on replacing it. Instead I'm looking into a made-to-fit lens protector from powerbronze. I would have to get one that's dark enough to hide the damage while the lights are off but not so dark that it compromises my night vision. They have them in black, dark smoke and light smoke. If its too dark I can always put in some 6000k HID lights I guess.

The real question is: can a cop fuck with me about this? Is there an actual law on the books that could be interpreted as prohibiting a tinted lens cover?

I'd like to thank scruit in advance, as I'm guessing he will cite the orc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Head lights aren't important at all. I recommend removing them along with your tail light.

LOL

On a serious note, not being sure if they are legal or not, I do see them on lots of 4 wheeled vehicles. The other night on 270 I followed a lifted 4 x 4 and thought his tail lights were out. Only when I got right up behind him did I see they were one, but so dim I could barely make them out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Motorcycle internet forums aren't the best place to ask for legal advice. If you think a cop can fuck with you about something you put on your bike and you do it anyway, expect at some point now or in the future a cop to be bored and fuck with you, since they essentially can over anything, both real and imagined. Legal arguments aren't made on the curbside, they're made in court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cheech, you haven't told me anything I didn't already know there....I was looking for an answer to my question. I've seen different people who know the law better than me post up the actual language from the O.R.C. on different topics and was kinda looking for that type of response, or maybe someone who had been pulled over and charged for it in the past, not a brief lecture on 'if a cop wants to be a Dick....'.

Anyone got a real answer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was told the dark smoke are not legal by an officer. I was not using it we sold them.

(A) No person who is the owner or operator of a motor vehicle shall fail to display in plain view on the front and rear of the motor vehicle the distinctive number and registration mark, including

sticker and any validation sticker issued under sections 4503.19 and 4503.191 of the Revised Code, furnished by the director of public safety, except that a manufacturer of motor vehicles or dealer therein, the holder of an in transit permit, and the owner or

motorized bicycle, manufactured

trailer, or semitrailer shall display on the rear only. A motor vehicle that is issued two license plates shall display the validation sticker only on the rear license plate, except that a commercial tractor that does not receive an apportioned license plate under the international registration plan shall display the validation sticker

commercial tractor. An apportioned vehicle receiving an apportioned license plate

registration plan shall display the license plate only on the front of a commercial tractor and on the rear of all other vehicles. All license plates shall be securely fastened so as not to swing, and shall not be covered by any material that obstructs their visibility.

Edited by snot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was told the dark smoke are not legal by an officer. I was not using it we sold them.

(A) No person who is the owner or operator of a motor vehicle shall fail to display in plain view on the front and rear of the motor vehicle the distinctive number and registration mark, including

sticker and any validation sticker issued under sections 4503.19 and 4503.191 of the Revised Code, furnished by the director of public safety, except that a manufacturer of motor vehicles or dealer therein, the holder of an in transit permit, and the owner or

motorized bicycle, manufactured

trailer, or semitrailer shall display on the rear only. A motor vehicle that is issued two license plates shall display the validation sticker only on the rear license plate, except that a commercial tractor that does not receive an apportioned license plate under the international registration plan shall display the validation sticker

commercial tractor. An apportioned vehicle receiving an apportioned license plate

registration plan shall display the license plate only on the front of a commercial tractor and on the rear of all other vehicles. All license plates shall be securely fastened so as not to swing, and shall not be covered by any material that obstructs their visibility.

:lol:Didn't read past the first sentence, huh?

Legal or not, I know people who removed them due to being hassled. Kinda like the illegal dark window tint someone else ranted about awhile back. It's a great excuse for them to pull you over. It's just a matter of if one of them bothers to find the code and enforce it.

I think covering any lights on a street used vehicle is stupid, but that's just me. :nono:

Edit to ad-

Quick google fu-

Ohio Administrative Code 4501-15, vehicle headlights must allow drivers to see people and vehicles at least 350 feet ahead. Headlight covers containing non-factory parts that reduce brightness or change the beam's color violate state law, resulting in a minor misdemeanor.

Edited by imaposer
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Snot, we may have an issue with your reading comprehension.

Poser, thanks. It's a money thing as far as what I want to do, but it would also look really cool with what I want to do because the windshield I bought is dead black and it v's down to the headlight, so I would have uninterrupted black from the lights to the top of the windshield.

Another option is to pull the light, cut off the lens, black out the reflector, install HID projectors and then cover with a clear lens protector. Lots of guys have done this mod and it looks killer but costs a couple hundred and is time consuming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Snot, we may have an issue with your reading comprehension.

Poser, thanks. It's a money thing as far as what I want to do, but it would also look really cool with what I want to do because the windshield I bought is dead black and it v's down to the headlight, so I would have uninterrupted black from the lights to the top of the windshield.

Another option is to pull the light, cut off the lens, black out the reflector, install HID projectors and then cover with a clear lens protector. Lots of guys have done this mod and it looks killer but costs a couple hundred and is time consuming.

If it's just a looks thing, I'd ignore it and just ride. I certainly wouldn't do anything that results in a reduction of light output. Of course, my bike is illegal when I turn on all my lights as well.

20120712_193706-M.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah its a looks thing, I like my bike to turn heads when possible. You don't see many tl1000s's on the road these days so I want mine to look awesome. What's the point of owning a semi-rare bike if it doesn't look or perform well?

:lol:

You're talking to someone who has this tucked under a blanket in the corner of the garage. Hasn't been ridden anywhere or seen by anyone who would appreciate it other than me in five years.

DSCF3530-M.jpg

I'm selfish that way. :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Head lights aren't important at all. I recommend removing them along with your tail light.

Whether they are legal or not, no.

A headlight's purpose is to illuminate the road ahead of you, so why do you want to reduce that effect? Not to mention it is your biggest defense to getting run over at night. Planning on diluting that too?

The tinting will bring the HIDs down to below halogen light levels usually. And the non-ricer color temperature you're looking for is 4300K.

$150 for a headlight is cheap in the terms of maintenance costs. If you can't afford to play, sell the bike.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dafuq is wrong wichoo mane?

No, I get it...the maintenance on those desmo motors is expensive, can't blame you for not riding it...

Nah, air cooled two valve. Simple enough even a monkey like me can work on them myself.

DSCF0230-M.jpg

Dunno why. Same reason I put the buell up for sale, just lack of enthusiasm for riding. Heck, I even paid for plates last year and still never got it out for more than a couple miles. I started thinking about a track bike last year(which led me to join this site) as I think it's the street aspect of riding that I have lost the lust for.

Glad this thread was done. Kinda jacked it a bit, huh. :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cheech, you haven't told me anything I didn't already know there....I was looking for an answer to my question.
The real question is: can a cop fuck with me about this? Is there an actual law on the books that could be interpreted as prohibiting a tinted lens cover?

I answered your question. If you want validation on your decision to put one on there, you should have just come out and said it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Poser, you should track the duc. Something tells me this thread ain't over yet...

I would love to buy a second duc to track. Came close a couple times last year to doing exactly that. But, I won't be tracking this one. Too pretty and too much invested in it at this point to throw it down the track.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...