Window tinting for driver and passenger front seats side windows - is it a good idea?

This is an excellent summary. I suffer from Skin Cancer issues. I also know the physics on how eyes work and the more light that gets through the glass the better you see, especially as you get old. So I get max uv protection and no more IR .. by the way the Land Cruiser has good UV protection from the get go.. I got an UV meter and measured mine ..
jack, can you provide more details about your readings with the UV meter?

Here in the sunny, dry north, police will write tickets for any non-factory tint on the front side windows. I've looked and looked, but can't find any details from Toyota about the UV protection on the front side windows. The windshield, being laminated glass, should provide good protection. Our F150 also uses laminated glass for the front side windows, which is great, except if one has to break the glass to escape when in water, etc. I wish that Toyota took UV and other sun dangers more seriously.
 
Havenโ€™t seen anyone mention legality issues. Depending on the state it maybe illegal, even if its illegal but not enforced, a cop will use it for probable cause to pull you over.
 
So, my 2025 Land Cruiser is 2 weeks old. The side windows for the driver and passenger side are not tinted. What's the pros and cons? Do you think tinting cuts down significant clarity for the side mirrors?
I have ceramic tint all around on my LC. It cuts down the heat immensely and also gives me privacy when carrying my photography gear. My state allows 30% so that's what I'm at and I haven't noticed any significant loss in vision at night. If there is ever an occasion where the conditions are darker than my normal night driving, I would just roll the window down to see better. But that's just me. :) I love the look with the tint as well.
 

Attachments

  • 20241220_154959.jpg
    20241220_154959.jpg
    782.1 KB · Views: 85
ceramic tint will greatly reduce ir and uv. if you are concerned about being too dark they make very light tint as well. cutting down ir reduces heat and easier for your ac to maintain a comfortable temp at a lower fan speed. cutting back uv is good for your skin as well as your interior from degrading.
One thing on the different tint levels - the lower the tint level (more clear the class) the less heat rejection you get. The advertisements for the film all say up to 98% heat/uv rejection but that is based on the darkest tint. I had the darkest tint on my previous tacoma and it rejected virtually all the heat but I couldn't see out of it at night. I went with the second clearest tint and was disappointed in the amount of heat rejection this time around. I took it back to the shop thinking they had installed the wrong film, went through the specs and the lowest one only has about 50% of the heat rejection as the darkest. I also bought a uv meter off amazon and confirmed was only getting about 55% rejection...an improvement over stock but no where near the darker shades.
 
I love the look of the entire LC with consistent tint, however Iโ€™m older (no, probably old) and I was worried about seeing well at night. Iโ€™m definitely doing a brow on the front window, however Iโ€™m struggling with the front side windows.
 
Ceramic is the way to go. I did 15% onto the back windows because I didn't want anyone looking in to see what is innthe back. Front window to keep legal I had to go with 20%. I also did 20% on the sun roof.
 

Attachments

  • 20250602_123914.jpg
    20250602_123914.jpg
    577 KB · Views: 105
Bought a used Tundra, back in the day, that had front side windows tinted to match the rear. I was initially concerned about low light visibility but never found it to be an issue and the advantages have caused me to tint every car I've owned since then.
 
Can't pass safety inspection with tint on driver and passenger front windows or windshield in my state. :confused:
Wisconsin is that way as well. I however used a loophole and received a letter from my Optometrist requiring tint. Even then the law says a max of 30% Keeping the heat out of the vehicle in the summer is very nice, but having heat in the winter is nice as well.
 
Wisconsin is that way as well. I however used a loophole and received a letter from my Optometrist requiring tint. Even then the law says a max of 30% Keeping the heat out of the vehicle in the summer is very nice, but having heat in the winter is nice as well.
Yes, it is nice to have heat in the winter. I find I don't need the tint that I needed when I was in Texas now that I'm so far north.
 
jack, can you provide more details about your readings with the UV meter?

Here in the sunny, dry north, police will write tickets for any non-factory tint on the front side windows. I've looked and looked, but can't find any details from Toyota about the UV protection on the front side windows. The windshield, being laminated glass, should provide good protection. Our F150 also uses laminated glass for the front side windows, which is great, except if one has to break the glass to escape when in water, etc. I wish that Toyota took UV and other sun dangers more seriously.
The meters are about 50 dollars on Amazon.. I went out on a sunny day and measured the value with the window up and down and I recall the uv decreased about 75% with the oem window.. the uv light is what causes cancer, the inferred which the darker color blocks is what heats the vehicle.
 
I did legal tint which is 24% but probably around 20%. You can still see out of it at night and for me it is perfect.. I matched another vehicle I own front windows to the factory rear windows tint and it was so dark at night you couldn't see out and caused my son to sideswipe a tesla. I took a heat gun to the tint and pulled it off next day.
 
We're pretty good around guns and sales/income tax, but get funny on like weed and windshields.
Pretty good around medical freedom as well which is why the windshield tint laws were perplexing. There is also the "poke" with tire/wheel offset and safety inspections that are a head scratcher as well. :LOL:
 
Back
Top