[Sawyer]

Not just CR 70, but an even clearer CR 90 is illegal.

Perhaps you need to wear a full sleeve shirt, that will at least address the hands issue.

[Sawyer]

Originally Posted by bhaskaracs

Now the problem with Elantra is the sloping roof at the back.

The design of almost every modern car is suited for where these are usually designed, in the West, where the Sun isn't something to avoid as it is in India. Notice how much more sunlight comes even in your lap in front, compared to the old days Fiats/Ambassadors. It is a big price to pay for looking modern.

[Turbohead]

Originally Posted by madhav14

.

I'm thinking to go with the clear tints that 3M used to have (CR-70). It is a completely clear tint. Even that is illegal? Need your advice on this please.

I'm really worried about getting some sort of skin cancer very soon because of this radiation exposure (Already the skin on the right hand became very dry and lifeless.) I can't risk myself anymore to this.

Also, I would like to find out a way to file a case against the Government if something happens to me because of this stupid idiotic rules

Like Sawyer said, use full sleeve shirts. Also use sunscreens with a rating of atleast SPF 50. Don't use it always though as your skin can also become extra sensitive
Sunfilms like CR 70 can be applied on the windshield and the back glass. We have done the same on our car and the cops don't bother( or they don't notice) as the side glasses don't have any.
You can try magnetic sun shades for the side glasses.
Note: Install sunfilms at your own risk. Yes, it has its positives but you're going against the law. Be informed.

[mrbaddy]

Posting this to seek some information or alternatives to the sun-films.

Baleno launched with UV cut glasses.

Can we change the window glasses altogether to some UV cut glasses like on Baleno? Is it even possible?

Are such glasses even available for purchase to be applied on a car?

If yes, how much extra cost are we staring at?

I'm looking for generic information on this and not specific to any car model.

[Sawyer]

The only legal solution is that installed by the manufacturer before the car leaves the factory.

Manufacturers are legally permitted to install any kind of glass as long as they comply with the regulations of how much light has to pass through - I think that is 70%.

The logic of the SC decision is that having given the manufacturer this permission, and assuming it is used to its limit, even a film that cuts only 1% light will be crossing that limit.
Allowing different films to be installed on the basis that some manufacturers may not have used any or all of the limit available to them will be impossible to effectively enforce.

We may not like it, but the SC decision isn't irrational.

A bigger risk to using " not noticeable" films is in an accident situation. Insurance companies will be within their rights to deny any liability if the car is found to have any illegal modification, and sun film will count as just that.

[bblost]

Originally Posted by madhav14

Now, this is really getting annoying. I have tried all sorts of alternatives, sticky shades, magnetic sun shades etc. But, nothing is working out for me.

I wear a hoodie on long drives. I use a black one but feel a white one would be better.

It protects my hands and keeps me comfortable. If the sun hits my cheeks then I cover my head as well.

[honeybee]

Hire a driver and travel in the backseat? Back seats have much less sunlight.

[Sawyer]

Not too many are aware of the nature of the glass provided by the manufacturer while evaluating the features of a new car being bought. This ought to be high on the desired features list and will then force the use of glass which makes full use of the legally allowed limits. It will also encourage use of advanced glass that does the tricks like 100% UV blocking and others. Far more useful than all the glitter, chrome, fancy alloys and the rest for a country with as much sunlight as India.

[n.devdath]

Originally Posted by madhav14

I'm thinking to go with the clear tints that 3M used to have (CR-70). It is a completely clear tint. Even that is illegal? Need your advice on this please.

The SC has bigger issues on its plate now and the sunfilm campaign has lost its sheen anyway.

Even otherwise, if I were you, I'd have installed the CR-70 or the CR-90 (depending on what I could afford) on all sides of my car, topped it up with those cheapo sunshades on the windows or good quality magnetic blinds.

Nothing is more important than your health and well-being.

"Jaan hai to jahaan hai...!!".

[Vik0728]

Originally Posted by bblost

I wear a hoodie on long drives. I use a black one but feel a white one would be better.

Originally Posted by honeybee

Hire a driver and travel in the backseat? Back seats have much less sunlight.

Honestly honeybee, though your suggestion seems logical, I think I would go with the more sensible option from bblost

I always have a hoodie in the trunk for such occasions. Unless you are driving through open roads between 8-10 am or 4-6 pm, sunlight seldom reaches your face. So for the most part, a hoodie or a full sleeve jacket helps a lot.

Ofcourse, unless SC passes a law that occupants on private cars cannot wear full sleeves or something

Originally Posted by n.devdath

The SC has bigger issues on its plate now and the sunfilm campaign has lost its sheen anyway.

Seriously n.devdath, the sun film seems to be the least of headaches of late, at least on Bangalore roads. I have started noticing many cars with sun films (some very dark), zipping past cops and they never really seem to attract any attention.

Probably, a more mature judgement from SC may eventually provide some legal alternatives/solutions to this menace.

[sairamboko]

I think 3M's UV protection film is a good alternative. I just fixed one on my nano on the main glass.

[Sawyer]

I thought the title of the thread is about legal alternatives. I also thought this forum has a policy of not discussing illegal ones for any aspect of driving.

[SDP]

Its been 3 and half years since the thread has been started. The supreme-court order is from a date even prior to that.

What bothers me is that in these three and half years, not a single car manufacturer has tried to address this problem right at the production level. I believe the new Baleno comes with UV-cut glass and at least tries to address the "harm from UV rays" part of the problem. What is stopping other manufacturers from providing better tinted glass as stock?

[byomjeet]

Dear Madhav14,

It is really painful to drive during the day when the sun ray is falling right on you. Just imagine what will happen in summer. But it seems, there is no solution to the problem except the few that are available in the market these days as you have mentioned.

My brother's car had completely clear films but he was stopped by the cops and was told that its not allowed to stick any sort of film on the glass and he ended up paying the fine for the same.

To add to it. While breaking breads with the senior most police officer of a metro, I was shown a letter that was received by him from a cine star to allow his wife to use films on her car windows as she was having some skin problem. When I asked the officer about his decision, I was told that he will follow the rule. There is no special consideration.

[Sawyer]

Originally Posted by SDP

not a single car manufacturer has tried to address this problem right at the production level. I believe the new Baleno comes with UV-cut glass and at least tries to address the "harm from UV rays" part of the problem. What is stopping other manufacturers from providing better tinted glass as stock?

That may not be correct, the luxury car makers are probably doing something about this already, though I can't be sure.
If Maruti was to highlight this as a feature, the me too instinct will force others to copy this as well.
T Bhp also has a role it can play if it chooses to, by highlighting this as a feature in the official test reports and how well the glass works, with less focus on things like chrome and cup holders.