[PatchyBoy]

Originally Posted by mahadev_kc

When I replaced rear-windshield in my Palio 1.6 Sports 2006, I got the rear-windshield clearly marking as min 70% transparency. But the OEM glasses on all side did not have this marking. But if you look at the one of the link I posted, it says that AS1 and AS2 glasses are having a minimum of 70% transparency...

True. But not all cars seem to have AS1 or AS2 markings either. IS:2553 part 2 itself specifies that "VLT of safety glass shall be 70 percent min for windscreen and 50 percent min for glasses other than windscreen, when tested in accordance with Annex C of IS 2553 (part 1) : 1990"

Therefore it will be safe to assume that all glasses other than windscreen will have 50% VLT minimum. But the usual trend seems to be 70% minimum. The point is, nowhere is one able to find the maximum or the actual VLT. Tempered glass when manufactured can have VLT as high as 90%, depending on the manufacturing process and specifically Iron content in the glass. More the Iron content, less the VLT.

Rajan

[harry10]

I noticed today many cars in delhi with sunfilms. Seems as the drive has fizzled out people have started to put back the films. Thinking of doing the same as delhi heat is unbearable these days.

[autocrat]

Originally Posted by harry10

I noticed today many cars in delhi with sunfilms. Seems as the drive has fizzled out people have started to put back the films. Thinking of doing the same as delhi heat is unbearable these days.

If that's the case its still better to go with tint free films with good heat rejection - like CR70 from 3M. All they want to ensure is that we are not doing some illegal activity behind tints.

[nareshtrao]

Originally Posted by PatchyBoy

Oh. Post #2048 has a picture of Waggy's car window. If you are referring to the same one, then here is what it means:
Applying the above logic, this glass must have been manufactured in June 2009 and this car must have been manufactured / purchased some time in the July - Dec 2009 time frame. This is only a guess and could be incorrect.

Rajan

Thanks a lot Rajan. However, I still do not get the VLT rating of the glass. How do you decipher that here?

[Waggy]

Originally Posted by PatchyBoy

Oh. Post #2048 has a picture of Waggy's car window. If you are referring to the same one, then here is what it means:
Attachment 932085

This picture has 09 ......

Applying the above logic, this glass must have been manufactured in June 2009 and this car must have been manufactured / purchased some time in the July - Dec 2009 time frame. This is only a guess and could be incorrect.

Rajan

Spot on Rajan! The Car was manufactured sometime in Jul/Aug and purchased in Sept 09

Originally Posted by nandans2005

Waggy,
...
Appreciate efforts.

Nandans,

I agree and I appreciate him for his knowledge and sharing this with us whole heartedly! My comments didn't mean to insult any member here and If my words gives that kind of impression, I'm sorry!

[IronH4WK]

Isn't VLT percentage supposed to be imprinted on the automotive glass? I mean, isn't this mandatory?

The reason I ask is because tomorrow when the cops come checking, how do they know or convinced that the VLT meets the prescribed limits. They're not gonna sit and decipher codes, are they?

[PatchyBoy]

Originally Posted by nareshtrao

Thanks a lot Rajan. However, I still do not get the VLT rating of the glass. How do you decipher that here?

That is my whole point. When the law and standards dictate a specific minimum VLT, then why is not explicitly printed on the glass? Agreed that printing IS:2553 Part 2, automatically implies that the glass complies with the specifications of 70% for front and rear and 50% for side windows, what is lacking is the exact VLT of the glass. Both 51% and 90% comply.

A closer look at the manufacturing process might throw some light.

Annealed flat glass is cut to shape, as specified by the car manufacturer, finished and then tempered. The markings we see are put on the glass during the tempering process. The glass cannot be worked upon after tempering. So, all holes and other required work is done before tempering.

The manufacture of the glass itself is done in batch process. Ideally, all glass manufactured in one batch would have approximately the same VLT. Therefore, if glass from the same batch is used for making both rear windscreen and side windows, then the VLT of both would be the same, i.e. >70% to be compliant. The loop hole is, while the standard specifies minimum, it does not talk about maximum. So, the glass with VLT >70% is compliant for both rear windscreen and side windows. So, the manufacturers get away with >70% VLT glass for the side windows as well.

That would explain the need for Sun Control Films, as 70% VLT is almost transparent to the naked eye. The Sun Control Film manufacturers took advantage of this loop hole to manufacture their films and claim "CMVR compliant", as the application of some varieties of such films did not lower the VLT of the side windows to a level that would make it non-compliant.

Once consumers experienced the advantages of the film, they wanted more and the companies started making darker and darker films, to as low as 5% VLT. While they were very much aware that application of such films would render the glass non-compliant, they felt that not claiming compliance was enough. Obviously, sales would suffer, if they were to ask the customer - "By applying this film you are breaking the law. Are you sure you want to go ahead ?". Honestly, I would not be surprised if something to this effect is fine printed somewhere on the box the film comes in, just to absolve themselves, while being fully aware that most consumers would not even see the box, leave alone reading the fine print. While this was permitted on rear side windows in some countries, the Indian law did not have any such provision.

The average Indian consumer makes purchase decisions based on various factors like appearance, cost, durability and VFM. Compliance to the law is seldom on the list and usually somewhere in the bottom, even if it is considered. That is due to the lack of proper enforcement mechanism in our country. There is also no consumer awareness mechanism either.

Manufacturers and vendors take advantage of this and install these non-compliant films on our cars. A few of these consumers decided to misuse this and committed crimes behind the sun film. This resulted in one do-gooder filing a PIL. The rest as we all know is history.

Rajan

[ajman28]

Originally Posted by PatchyBoy

Please read my blog, when you find time. I just posted this on BTP's FB page:

"Since this removal of Sun Control Film is being implemented seriously all over the country and only official cars of Z/Z+ are exempt and the SC ruling clearly states that they prohibit the use of black films of any VLT percentage or any other material upon the safety glasses, windscreens (front and rear) and side glasses of all vehicles throughout the country (para 27) and since BTP is understaffed, I volunteer to be available in the weekends to help remove sun flims of all VLT from Police cars, Buses and VIP's personal vehicles. How many are game? Like this post if you are ready to ensure equal justice."

Simply superb!!
Did you get a reply to this post?

[PatchyBoy]

Originally Posted by ajman28

Simply superb!!
Did you get a reply to this post?

Thanks. I got 4 likes, including one from BTP and 2 replies. One of the likes was from a friend who is not in the country. Speaks a lot about how much the AAM ADMI cares about himself.

I posted this as a response myself - "The point is, they will be spending out tax money to remove films on these public vehicles anyways. So, why not we pitch in, do it ourselves and save more wastage of our hard earned money."

And NO, BTP just liked it. Did not reply.


BTW, here is a novice, unsubstantiated, unproven and theortical way of finding out the VLT of your car glasses:

1. Download and install Paint.net or any other photo editing software that supports layers
2. Park your car against a blank wall, with the window rolled down half way
3. Take a picture of the wall, making sure you get the wall both directly as well as through the window
4. Now import this picture to you laptop / PC and open with the image editing SW
5. Cut the part of the picture with the wall visible through the window glass and paste into a new layer
6. Now increase the brightness of that layer, till the Glass become invisble
7. Theortically, 100 - the percentage of brightness increase should give you the actual VLT of the glass.

See these pictures:

Un altered picture -


Picture after increasing the brightness by 15%


From this I assume that the VLT of my car window is approximately 85%, which means I can apply 70% VLT film and still be CMVR compliant, albeit illegal as per SC ruling.

Disclaimer : This is not a proven way to find the VLT of glass and will not be admissible in the court of law.

Rajan

[SLK]

Originally Posted by PatchyBoy

1. Download and install Paint.net or any other photo editing software that supports layers
2. Park your car against a blank wall, with the window rolled down half way
3. Take a picture of the wall, making sure you get the wall both directly as well as through the window
4. Now import this picture to you laptop / PC and open with the image editing SW
5. Cut the part of the picture with the wall visible through the window glass and paste into a new layer
6. Now increase the brightness of that layer, till the Glass become invisble
7. Theortically, 100 - the percentage of brightness increase should give you the actual VLT of the glass.

Disclaimer : This is not a proven way to find the VLT of glass and will not be admissible in the court of law.

, that is innovative though!. I used a picture of my optra (already posted on this thread), I used a thick colour dropper tool (which gave me average colour of that area) and the worst possible result I got was 70.75% VLT. That is on a glass that has 70% MIN transparency and a 70% V-kool film.

Peace.....

[CANPUSH]

In UAE you can see most cars and buses without dark glasses or sun film. Still when you get into a car parked in sun for hours, you do not feel the heat, also once the car is started in 3-4 minutes car is cool.

They use glasses with heat reflective or heat absorbent coating. This coating does not alter the transparency yet reflects good amount of heat from sun. I believe manufacturers like saint gobain supply this glass. In India still such glasses are not readily available. May be because of cost. However, with this SC verdict soon we should see these things in market and may be even car manufacturers will start offering this option to us. This is at least possible for high end cars where the percentile increase in cost will be negligible as compared to middle and lower end cars.

Wait and watch.

[rameshnanda]

Finally, removed (DIY) the sunfilms (3M CS20) on my Linea. It took 30 minutes for uninstalling the film from windows and the rear windshield. It is not tough at all as it was perceived earlier. But, it was a tough decision for sure :(.

[autocrat]

Originally Posted by rameshnanda

Finally, removed (DIY) the sunfilms (3M CS20) on my Linea. It took 30 minutes for uninstalling the film from windows and the rear windshield. It is not tough at all as it was perceived earlier. But, it was a tough decision for sure :(.

Rameshnanda, What technique did you use? Blade and soapwater? Or did you heat the glass in some way?

I removed my Indica's Garware classic film yesterday - partly successful. On the side windows, when I tried to peel the film, only one layer of film with tint came off
The second layer was sticking to glass and is completely transparent, so I left it as it is.

However, this wasn't the case with rear glass. A lot of gum is on the glass and I don't know how to clean it :(

Here is a pic of the transparent film still on the glass. Sorry for poor quality - phone pic.

[CrAzY dRiVeR]

Originally Posted by autocrat

However, this wasn't the case with rear glass. A lot of gum is on the glass and I don't know how to clean it :(

Try a general purpose glass cleaner like Colin. Just spray on the gum and rub it off. Worked for me.

Since my film was new, and a cheap one provided by the dealer - there was a lot of gum left on the glass. Although the guys who removed the sunfilm tried hard for more than an hour - it still wasn't to my satisfaction.

[sumeethaldankar]

Use a spray like colin and use a razor blade to scrape off the sticky glue.Be careful with the blade and use a piece of paper wrapped around the blade where you would be holding the blade in your fingers so as not to cut yourself.

Spray the area where it is sticky and scrape off with the blade while it's still wet.The glue would come off easily.

Good Luck.