Window tinting options

[Neurio]

I was hoping to solicit some opinions regarding which window tint is best, if any. Doing some research, it looks like 3M Crystalline and Xpel Prime XR Plus are some of the best out there.

I have attached their specs for reference, but it seems like the 3M has better energy and IR rejection, but only slightly. I was thinking 70 for the windshield and front windows and either 50/55 or 40/45 for the rear sides and back windshield.

I haven't price checked the 3M, but I've been quoted at $1200 for Xpel for all the windows, or $600-800 for just the 4 side windows.

Do any of you have recommendations? Thanks in advance.

 

[hydbob]

I did the 3m crystalline, 70 front, 50 backs.
Either one is good, it really just comes down to the installer for the workmanship.

 

[milgauss]

I did XPEL XR+ Nano-Ceramic, High Infrared Rejection. 35% on sides and rear. Didn't do the front. An installer I trust recommended the XR+ when I asked for what he thought was the best.

 

[Demosthenes]

I did the 3m crystalline, 70 front, 50 backs.
Either one is good, it really just comes down to the installer for the workmanship.

I was told that there’s a slight brownish hue to this product. Do you notice that? I’m considering it but wondering if it’ll look strange on my black GT

 

[hydbob]

I was told that there’s a slight brownish hue to this product. Do you notice that? I’m considering it but wondering if it’ll look strange on my black GT

Only at really steep angles

 

[Hcuellar77]

Anyone has any recs on installers that can do windshield in one piece? No one in town has been able to tell me they will do it in one piece, I am just looking for one piece that goes up to the visors without removing them but they want 3 pieces, one to the rear mirror and then 2 on each side to the visor. I said no and just did the ceramic tint on all other windows but the front.
Installers in Texas, LA, AK, FL or MS please.

 

[hydbob]

Anyone has any recs on installers that can do windshield in one piece? No one in town has been able to tell me they will do it in one piece, I am just looking for one piece that goes up to the visors without removing them but they want 3 pieces, one to the rear mirror and then 2 on each side to the visor. I said no and just did the ceramic tint on all other windows but the front.
Installers in Texas, LA, AK, FL or MS please.

Supposedly 3M has a template for a 1 piece install. See if you can find someone who uses 3M and ask. At least, that's what the shop told me since mine was installed as a single piece

 

[Demosthenes]

My installer in San Diego seems to believe it can be done in one piece after taking off the sun visors. Which got me curious - anyone removed the sun visors permanently yet? I’m thinking after a 50% tint, I don’t even need to replace them and leave them permanently off which I’ve always wanted to do so that the glass is uninterrupted.

 

[hmp10]

The newest windshield and roof glass that Tesla, Lucid, and Rivian are using is VERY effective in blocking UV and IR radiation. I live in south Florida and have had no problem at all from heat in the cabin with either our Air or our Model S Plaid. That was not the case with our 2015 Model S, in which we put 3M Crystalline film on the side windows (it had the metal roof, and we used the sun mesh in the rear window). The film helped noticeably with cabin heat, but it created a blue-biased rainbow effect when viewing outside objects at certain angles, and after about five years a couple of bubbles developed.

You might want to live with your cars a while to see if you really need to put film on the windshield and canopy.

 

[Demosthenes]

Agreed that the heat rejection is pretty darn good but on hot days I do still find I need to turn up the AC for perfect comfort. I think just a little more heat rejection would be perfect for me so that’s why I’m considering the 3M crystalline. Also, if I’m going to permanently remove the sun visors then I want my front windshield to be tinted darker.

 

[TCGT]

Agreed that the heat rejection is pretty darn good but on hot days I do still find I need to turn up the AC for perfect comfort. I think just a little more heat rejection would be perfect for me so that’s why I’m considering the 3M crystalline. Also, if I’m going to permanently remove the sun visors then I want my front windshield to be tinted darker.

Curious...has anyone actually removed the sun visors yet?

 

[hmp10]

Curious...has anyone actually removed the sun visors yet?

Since they're required by federal law, I think any shop that would agree to remove them might be a bit on the dodgy side.

Also, if you were in an accident in which it could be argued that sun glare was a factor, interesting legal questions could be raised. And I doubt if an insurance company would cover an accident claim for a car if it found a mandated safety feature had been deliberately removed.

 

[Demosthenes]

Since they're required by federal law, I think any shop that would agree to remove them might be a bit on the dodgy side.

Also, if you were in an accident in which it could be argued that sun glare was a factor, interesting legal questions could be raised. And I doubt if an insurance company would cover an accident claim for a car if it found a mandated safety feature had been deliberately removed.

Hm those are good points! Still on the fence. Even with the visors on, the glass roof gives a wonderful sense of space.

 

[PhotoEye]

Hm those are good points! Still on the fence. Even with the visors on, the glass roof gives a wonderful sense of space.

You can pivot them to the side and flip up to achieve 95% of the windshield clearance without having to dismantle. Moreover, there are many times where driving due East/West, at the right times, requires the shade -- even with the best of sunglasses (unless you have the airplane pilot type!).

 

[hmp10]

Hm those are good points! Still on the fence. Even with the visors on, the glass roof gives a wonderful sense of space.

I had hoped Lucid would keep the "batwings" in the windshield of the prototype as a place to store a folding sunshade. I almost fell off my chair when I saw those clunky new sunshades glued to the glass. I've gotten used to them, but they really do spoil some of the effect of airiness that back seat passengers experience more.

 

[Demosthenes]

I had hoped Lucid would keep the "batwings" in the windshield of the prototype as a place to store a folding sunshade. I almost fell off my chair when I saw those clunky new sunshades glued to the glass. I've gotten used to them, but they really do spoil some of the effect of airiness that back seat passengers experience more.

Yeah totally agree!! A foldable or other elegant solution would’ve been really great.

 

[duc900]

Since they're required by federal law, I think any shop that would agree to remove them might be a bit on the dodgy side.

Also, if you were in an accident in which it could be argued that sun glare was a factor, interesting legal questions could be raised. And I doubt if an insurance company would cover an accident claim for a car if it found a mandated safety feature had been deliberately removed.

Are you certain they are legally required to drive? Meaning, it is a requirement for scale manufacturers to have them upon sale of a new vehicle but that is not synonymous with it is required to leave on post purchase. I could not find where it explicitly states that legal requirement. Found some vague excerpts suggesting it is not a law in CA as an example.

Does anyone actually know?

 

[hmp10]

Note that I referred to a shop removing a sun visor, not the owner. https://www.nhtsa.gov/interpretations/1869y makes this statement regarding modifications to sun visors:

"No manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative ... any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard . . . ."

An owner may remove the visors with impunity, at least in terms of violating federal regulations. However, that is the only person who may do so. But remember, in the event of an accident involving claims of sun glare, an owner who removed visors could still be found liable under tort law of negligence without regard to federal regulations.

The position insurers might take is another matter and would have to be answered by referring to the terms of a specific policy.

 

[niceguy]

Are you certain they are legally required to drive? Meaning, it is a requirement for scale manufacturers to have them upon sale of a new vehicle but that is not synonymous with it is required to leave on post purchase. I could not find where it explicitly states that legal requirement. Found some vague excerpts suggesting it is not a law in CA as an example.

Does anyone actually know?

I was told by SA in Lucid studio that they are legally required, I don't like them either, may be lucid or some aftermarket guys can find a replacement for them that looks good, functional and complies with law

 

[duc900]

Note that I referred to a shop removing a sun visor, not the owner. https://www.nhtsa.gov/interpretations/1869y makes this statement regarding modifications to sun visors:

"No manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative ... any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard . . . ."

An owner may remove the visors with impunity, at least in terms of violating federal regulations. However, that is the only person who may do so. But remember, in the event of an accident involving claims of sun glare, an owner who removed visors could still be found liable under tort law of negligence without regard to federal regulations.

The position insurers might take is another matter and would have to be answered by referring to the terms of a specific policy.

Thanks, same article I had read.