I got a meter to evaluate my tint that did not come out as expected; so I used my friends TX he just got for reference. It turns out the factory tint is darker than what you would think; and contrary to what tint guys say, all windows do have significant protection.

Before getting a tint calculate that, fronts are about 80% and rears 20%. So if you get 35% tint on top of the fronts, a cops meter will read 28%, that is the legal limit in Florida.

 

I'm new to tints. So 20% visible = VLT. Then UVR/IRR is that amount let through or R is for rejected? That is to say, are those 95.5 and 94.2 "good" or would a clear tint on top of that help a great deal with heat and fading?

 

Yes, that would mean that 20 Visible Light Transmission is the amount of light that comes through; In my case I added 15% so 20x0.15= 6% Light is coming through my rear windows.

Most if not all tint guys will lead you to believe there is no UVR (Ultra Violet Rejection) and no IRR (Infra Red Rejection); in the case of the front windows they are blocking 100% UV, and 77% of the IRR.

My personal preference was to add 15% on the fronts that left me with 11.9 VLT, 100% UVR and 98.9 IRR; rears I added 35% that left them with 6.0 VLT, 100 UVR and 100% IRR. I got Xpel Prime XR Plus.

To get a great deal of improvement that you are looking for IMO it's mostly from blocking more light. I noticed a huge improvement on my front window.

 

I was happy to find these hard measurements in the closest cousin to my RX. Thanks

Would you suspect that the RX have factory VLT levels any different from what you measured on your TX?

Any chance you also measured the VLT level of the factory windshield, with 2 piece meter ?

 

no one cares about tint laws in FL unless you are throwing 20% on the windshield. it is so damn hot everyone is expected to have really dark tint and there is no vehicle inspection for regular passenger vehicles which is kind of nice, except you pay more for insurance...

tint below the 6" AS1 line is illegal on the windshield everywhere. so not sure why the VLT of the factory windshield matters. either your tint on the windshield is legal or not. I have a nearly 1 foot strip and it works great in 5%.

 

Just to be clear, I wasn't seeking legal advise - but was specifically asking the OP a technical questions since he did some great measurements. Interested in the RX specifically, in case he has done that - and if that's any different from the TX.

(Laws vary by state and there are medical exemptions to tinting laws in many US states)

 

To piggy back on wrinkle's question, do you think it's worth getting a nano ceramic tint on the RX? We've only had the vehicle for about a month and I'm not the daily driver of it.

 

I'm glad it gave you good info, that was the point of the post.

By my math it is the exact same levels as the RX.

I didn't go as far as getting the 2 piece meter for the windshield, but I expect it should have the same protection as the front side windows. As far as the tint laws comment, yes, I'd say in Florida most people get away with whatever tint they have; but I've had friends ticketed for the windshield, and don't know anyone with a ticket for the side windows.

Ceramics do help out a bit, but from my experience darkness is more important.

 

I did a ton of research and ultimately settled on nanoceramic tints and for skin UV/IR protections, and also after experiencing rather bad in-cabin heat during recent California heat waves. I didn't care about cosmetic/looks at all - but for radiation filtering alone. Llumar IRX for the front windows, Llumar Air 80 for the rear windows and windshield and Llumar Stratos for the panoramic sunroof. I think the most difference was from the sunroof and windshield tints, in terms of both exposure of sunrays and heat rejection experienced after tinting. In these nanoceramic films (within category of IRX), if you look at the specifications, the TSER and IRR levels do not vary much with VLT specifications - so they have essentially decoupled the visible light transmission levels from the UV/IR/heat transmissions - like a "band-pass filter". In other words, you can choose to have almost clear or light tints, and still take advantage of heat rejection - per the specifications. So to me, these were worth the cost relative to the carbon/dye/metallic tints as a long-term investment. However, my tint shop did not have tint-meters, so I was interested to know what the stock glass was rated at.

I found significant relief myself after installing these films, and if you are in the lower latitudes that receive very strong sunshine most of the year, I think they are worth the investment.