|
Post by Noberator on Dec 1, 2014 14:50:10 GMT 1
Just had a thought (yes I know it can be dangerous ) Didn't Rally cars used to have slide side windows made out of non glass material and some had holes in to help with ventilation. They had to be road legal as they were driven on the Queens Highway from stage to stage. I remember when a few Rally Drivers got done for speeding one year between stages. In the past yes And most top teams were lhd and registered overseas. Even some high end super cars had plexiglass side winsows, f40 for example In an F40 really. Well you learn something new everyday.
|
|
|
Post by Noberator on Dec 1, 2014 15:19:41 GMT 1
CU RegsIn this link above you can switch between Content and Table of Contents using the relevant tabs near the top left of the page. Section E VisionView to the front 30(1-3) Glass 31(1 a-c) TABLE (regulation 31(2)) TABLE II (regulation 32(10)) They keep using the terminology in various places in these CU regs as safety glazing. So does Perspex or some form of plastic fitted correctly constitute safety glazing? The way I read it the front screen has to be specified glass and any windows wholly or partly on either side of the driver's seat. All other Windows can be either specified safety glass or safety glazing. I'll throw it open for general discussion. My head hurts.
|
|
rpm
Apprentice
Posts: 1,504
|
Post by rpm on Dec 3, 2014 12:27:34 GMT 1
As I understand it front and front side windows have to be glass (to certain spec) but rear and side are optional. Put another way, there is a CU reg for a missing windscreen, but if a car is driving around with no rear or side windows is it against any such regs? Think convertibles etc? Mot regulations regarding rear windows? Do they even have to be present ? Therefore lightweight replacement (for motorsport use, road legal etc) is acceptable ? I think
|
|
|
Post by Noberator on Dec 3, 2014 14:35:55 GMT 1
As I understand it front and front side windows have to be glass (to certain spec) but rear and side are optional. Put another way, there is a CU reg for a missing windscreen, but if a car is driving around with no rear or side windows is it against any such regs? Think convertibles etc? Mot regulations regarding rear windows? Do they even have to be present ? Therefore lightweight replacement (for motorsport use, road legal etc) is acceptable ? I think Don't know about the MOT but no rear window required in CA regs. However if there is no rear window or visibility out of the rear window, you are mandated to have two side view mirrors (one on each side) of the vehicle to provide the driver with vision to the rear.
|
|
|
Post by Karl on Dec 3, 2014 14:45:58 GMT 1
No reason for rejection for missing or not fitted windscreen
So in theory your car could fail on a cracked screen or wipers not clearing screen and you take it away remove screen and get it back for re test for a pass
The Rear windscreen isn't part of mot
Talking about cracked windscreens they no longer necessary mean a fail , you have to judge weather the drivers view is excessively obscured or not
Think there are some cars without windscreens old vintage 1900's cars spring to mind and some 1 seater track cars
|
|
|
Post by sierra3dr on Aug 31, 2015 11:00:59 GMT 1
thanks for the CU Regs Nobster
|
|
|
Post by Noberator on Aug 31, 2015 13:04:33 GMT 1
thanks for the CU Regs Nobster Your welcome even though it was nearly a year ago. Is it all sorted now?
|
|
|
Post by studabear on Sept 4, 2015 21:07:32 GMT 1
No reason for rejection for missing or not fitted windscreen So in theory your car could fail on a cracked screen or wipers not clearing screen and you take it away remove screen and get it back for re test for a pass Tester might be pretty pissed when they test the windscreen washers lol
|
|
|
Post by Noberator on Sept 4, 2015 21:18:31 GMT 1
No reason for rejection for missing or not fitted windscreen So in theory your car could fail on a cracked screen or wipers not clearing screen and you take it away remove screen and get it back for re test for a pass Tester might be pretty pissed when they test the windscreen washers lol If the tester was pissed they shouldn't be testing should they. Yes I know what you meant but wouldn't they only re-test what it failed on.
|
|