Quote Originally Posted by blueafro View Post
Rusty,

What I linked was the latest available documentation from the state's public websites, in which I see specific mention in both the inspection and registration manuals of how to treat vehicles without windshields.

Since you are in the inspection business, you may have later documentation than the state has gotten around to publishing (and if the rules have changed without the state updating their website, it wouldn't be the first time). If so, it would be very valuable to this community and to the kit car community in general if you could publish the updated information. Even excerpts would be helpful.



As the posted link resolves, and the attribution of the quote states, it comes directly from the Texas DPS. Why DPS and DoT would give out different information I don't know, but I'm not terribly surprised. DPS claims inspections are under their purview. Does the DoT claim oversight also? (Again, I wouldn't be surprised if they did.)
I understand, I am not lashing out from the source you posted. I am just stating that it is old cause god knows the state doesnt update their website. I dont know what date our manual is from I have to find out on monday when I go in but I will say this the manual is just a tips sheet type thing. If you are still unsure about what is stated in the book cause you dont think said item fits you contact DPS and they will tell you if you may proceed or not.

For instance the state says we are to fail cars with window tint darker than 25% on the front side windows. But if you are a private investigator or a police officer in the state of texas if you go to the DPS you can get a waiver when shown at any inspection station and the window tint aspect is over looked.

On the windshield part I did some thinking on it and I think the reason its worded like it is is to prevent failiure of vintage cars. There were some cars in the very early 1900`s that did not have windshields and these cars would fail under the law so I think its possible the law was written the way it was to prevent that from happening.

Another example would be that we had a dune buggy come in, it was built on a 1983 VW chassis meaning it is a 1983 VW which makes it a safety only inspection. The only form of windshield he had was a small motorcycle like flat piece of plexiglass with no wipers. We contacted DPS since our manual didnt provide enough information to sastify us to pass it through. We were told that wipers were not required on the vehicle in question cause it was not a fully enclosed car it was basically a street legal go kart.

Another example of how the "rules" can be bent is in this case, I failed a vehicle because it had rear end damage the damage resulted in the Toyota Camery having its driverside tail light pushed forward and behind the lip of the trunk. The lens wasnt broken no white light was showing so it passed. But what caused me to fail it was that lens was not visable directly behind the vehicle meaning a car following behind only saw one tail light and brake light which following the book means it fails even though it passed for working condition.

The best was I could describe it in Texas is it is at the descrition of the person performing the inspection. If the inspector thinks something isnt safe he can fail it if it really isnt safe. But you have to be careful cause failing a car for something you think isnt safe but its not that big of a safety concern you could get in trouble instead.

For me if a kit car were to come to the shop I would be alittle more relaxed on my inspection but I will not pass it if something seems un safe about it. If the brakes didnt seem enough to me I would be inclined to fail it on the assumption that the brakes are not that good. We have a speed we should run and a distance the vehicle should stop in to pass. I will be honest and admit I dont follow that rule. I run the car up to speed and apply the brakes and if they feel like they are grabbing good and not requiring too much effort I pass the brakes if I feel comfortable with them.

As I tell the regular customers this is nothing but a numbers game, they dont want us to do two ASM tests back to back even though we dont have control over which vehicles come and in what order. Then they want us to fail cars they dont like us telling customers before hand that their car will fail safety wise or emission wise and let them fix it first they want us to fail the vehicle and take their money and tell them to fix it and come back in 15 days.

To cut this short though I will make a note of what sections to check in the latest hand guide and I will post what I find either monday night or tuesday night.