Headlight and Tail lights smoked...
 

just bought some for both... what is your guys' take on that? look good? bad?

im excited because i have yet to see a subaru here in reno with smoked lights so.... :D

well, we'll just see who's smoked tails get here first :p

Anyways, I kinda like the look. My taillights really need it, where as I dont' really think the Impreza taillights do. It looks good, but it isn't wholy necessary.

Headlights I'm a little sketchy on, because I don't like the idea of reducing my light output at night. The lighter ones would be okay for light output, but then they can sometimes look funky. Hopefully they won't look too brown.

Post pics up when you get them.

hehe... i bet yours will look sweet. I got the lighter ones cuz the 20% seemed too dark

Sorry to burst your guys' bubbles, but I've had smoked tails and sidemarkers since early 2003. I wouldn't do the headlights, the stock lights are bad enough as it is.

Yeah I've seen them on a ca-morrow, in Reno, a few years back. It's your own call, but I would waste my time or money on it.

Smoking headlights and tail lights is also another reason to get pulled over by the man.

Correct me if I am wrong Reno911, but I think it is not a legal mod in both NV and CA.

Depends on how much the tint is.

As I understand it, the California regs state that the brake lights of a car must be visible from 1000 feet. In Nevada, its only 300 feet. I can't remember if that is either in the daytime or night time. The tricky part, of course, is proof. An officer will certainly send you to the state ref (or whatever the Nevada equivalent is) if he wants to. If it isn't factory, then there is reason enough to give you a fix it ticket and send you to the state ref.

Either way, the tint I'm getting is very light, and is mainly there to get rid of the chromed/altezza look of my tail lights. It doesn't really darken the light output too much.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y42...ails/rear2.jpg