Sorry to veer off topic, but have you ever seen anyone's butt in a sling post-accident because of illegal tinting?
Well, as a Mod, I'll say we are on topic, somewhat (
), which is discussing mods on vehicles, especially ones that can flag in an accident. Tires can be a big red flag for attorneys and so can tinting, especially when it exceeds State vehicle code standards (and the list could go on...lift kits, even slight performance mods, like intakes and 'chipped' engines were brought up in cases I was involved in). I especially saw them bring this up in low light/nighttime accidents, naturally addressing visibility issues for both vehicles and their drivers, no matter who had the main fault potentially assigned. With the tinting, they would ALWAYS bring up visibility, either by the tinted vehicle driver or the other driver who could not see what was going on in the tinted vehicle.
Just like the tires, they are trying to push a percentage of fault one way or another and will use the tinting 'abnormality' against you if it is your vehicle that has the excess tinting. These are MAJOR accidents, not fender benders, BTW, and even a few percentage points pushed one way or another could mean a lighter/heavier criminal sentence or thousands of dollars more or less on the civil side.
This is why I was pointing out to the OP that the hundred or two saved by buying a more available but less expensive size of tire could backfire. Heck, I saw insurance companies back out of their commitment on defending or assisting drivers (civilly, of course, as 'criminal' actions are not covered) who had modded their cars/trucks and then didn't inform the insurance carrier and the carrier would point out that the policy was null and void and point to the section in the coverage that requires the insured to notify them of 'extensive vehicle modifications'. Now, just like the IRS code and many of the terms within it, that is a 'gray' term with no real detailed meaning....which just gives the insurance company the power to decide what that term actually means on a case by case basis...and force you to pay an attorney out of your pocket to fight for your version of the definition, not theirs....
Which takes us back to the main theme response that I made in the thread, and my OPINION that, based on what I have seen in both criminal and civil courts, saving a few bucks on that different sized tire doesn't make any sense to me at all, since there is a reason why the developer of the vehicle used that size to begin with. Now, changing out the wheels and tires as a package but keeping the same total size, that is a different story; however, again, just like the tinting, if I was investigating a fatality or major injury accident, any noted mods like that go into the report and any good attorney will use it to their advantage in a court of law or a settlement hearing for the benefit of their client, be they the vehicle driver/owner, or the insurance company. ANY mod or change that changes vehicle dynamics can and will be used against you, if possible, especially if they can point to any negative as a result. On tinting, it's visibility, on the slightly different tire size it could be handling dynamics, speedometer/odometer off calibration. That chipped engine? Too much power for the vehicle or the driver's experience/ability (usually saw that with a younger driver, a lift kit and very dark tinting....and the attorney would have a field day). Saw them all...shook my head on some; however, many of them had valuable enough points that I always look at the benefit of the change versus the potential adverse side effects.
Based on this, I won't change my tire size and only tint to the max allowed by my State.
Now, that power chip and cold air intake?