I completely understand needing flaps the width of the tire to keep rocks from flying (although all of my chips have come from dump trucks with uncovered loads. I think the UHP should crack down on that more), but if someone does have flaps that cover the entire width of the tire, but the flares are 1-2" not wide enough, are rocks really going to fly over the flaps and cause problems? I know in theory it is possible, but in reality has anyone seen it happen? Just kind of thinking out loud at the moment.
Safety Inspection laws *new and improved"
- Thread starter GOAT
- Start date
Brett
Meat-Hippy
- Location
- Salt Lake City Utah
Just to piss all of you off, I'm taking off my mud flaps. 
GOAT
Back from the beyond
- Location
- Roanoke, VA
Funny thing is, I've had more broken windshields in the 3.5 years I've lived in Utah than anywhere else. Impacts always seem to be in the drivers view BTW.
Never once was it from an 4x4 vehicle. Most have tires with voids too large to actually trap a rock. A majority are from people crossing lanes at high speed in construction areas (I-80E for me) and throwing stuff up in the air. The rest are from 18 wheelers that have crap falling/flying off of them or light duty construction trailers loaded with a dirty backhoe ETC.
Then there are the ones that you have no idea where the heck it came from
I don't hate the UHP since that is truly pointless. The legislators are the source of these laws that drive us nuts. The LEOs are just there to enforce them. When the enforcement becomes inconsistent, people get frustrated.
Even tough some of these laws are completely ridiculous, it sounds like it was much worse at one time. Some grassroots efforts improved the situation quite a bit. Well done.
Does the thought of shelling out $500.00 for god-ugly flares and putting mudflaps on Jenn's jeep still make me want to puke blood?
Yes.
Never once was it from an 4x4 vehicle. Most have tires with voids too large to actually trap a rock. A majority are from people crossing lanes at high speed in construction areas (I-80E for me) and throwing stuff up in the air. The rest are from 18 wheelers that have crap falling/flying off of them or light duty construction trailers loaded with a dirty backhoe ETC.
Then there are the ones that you have no idea where the heck it came from
I don't hate the UHP since that is truly pointless. The legislators are the source of these laws that drive us nuts. The LEOs are just there to enforce them. When the enforcement becomes inconsistent, people get frustrated.
Even tough some of these laws are completely ridiculous, it sounds like it was much worse at one time. Some grassroots efforts improved the situation quite a bit. Well done.
Does the thought of shelling out $500.00 for god-ugly flares and putting mudflaps on Jenn's jeep still make me want to puke blood?
Yes.
Last edited by a moderator:
If you see any for sale signs, we're in the market for one of those
:greg:
BroncoMama
Rock Diva
- Location
- Just south of craziness
If you see any for sale signs, we're in the market for one of those
You want a Ford.....I repeat, you want a Super Duty.....:greg: I wish I would've known how seriously you're shopping, we could've gone for a spin in MaKenzie and that would've sold you on how much fun Power Strokes are. :chris:
- Location
- Grantsville, Utah
I told you that I would report you. You thought I was joking.
GOAT
Back from the beyond
- Location
- Roanoke, VA
I didn't take you seriously from the day I met you.
Crankylove
Crankylove
- Location
- South Salt Lake
Wanna hear somethin stupid? Just for sheets and giggles, I called my friend who works at a testing station, just to see how rediculous this law is. My 2001 Ford Taurus came stock with 205/60/16's on it. Last time I replaced the tires, they had a less expensive, better tire in a 215/60/16, so I got them. Asked my buddy about my care being legal and needing mud flaps, and...............it may be legal, kinda, depending on who interpretes the law. My car does have bigger than stock tires on it, so legally, should have mud flaps now. However, it has a small extension of the plastic body trim, that hangs below the fender just a bit, like a permanent, built in flap. According to my testing station buddy, some officers may consider something like that to be a type of mud flap, while some, would say that it is just a piece of body trim, and that my car now needs flaps to comply with the law. The laws says I need mud flaps on my passenger car that already only sits 6" off the ground, even though about 60-70% of the tire is still inside the wheelwell? On to my truck. It's an '86 F250, no lift, cut fenders with bushwacker flares, and 315/75/16 BFG mudders. Legally it needs flaps because of the larger than stock tires. I have about 60% of the tire or so below the fender, but with no lift, it doesen't really look like it has that large of a tire. My brother has a '06 Dodge with stock 245/75/16 tires with no lift, although the rear of his truck is typical Dodge, sits pretty high is stock form. His truck from the factory has as much, if not more tire below the fender, than mine does, and came from the factory with no flares, but his is perfectly legal, cause he still has the stock tires on it. My buddy was laughin his butt off when I told him of this thread, and told me he has had quite a few people freak out on him when thier vehicles didnt pass for things like mud flaps and fender flares, which he can understand, but has to follow the law to keep his job.
On to my truck. It's an '86 F250, no lift, cut fenders with bushwacker flares, and 315/75/16 BFG mudders. Legally it needs flaps because of the larger than stock tires. I have about 60% of the tire or so below the fender, but with no lift, it doesen't really look like it has that large of a tire. My brother has a '06 Dodge with stock 245/75/16 tires with no lift, although the rear of his truck is typical Dodge, sits pretty high is stock form. His truck from the factory has as much, if not more tire below the fender, than mine does, and came from the factory with no flares, but his is perfectly legal, cause he still has the stock tires on it. My buddy was laughin his butt off when I told him of this thread, and told me he has had quite a few people freak out on him when thier vehicles didnt pass for things like mud flaps and fender flares, which he can understand, but has to follow the law to keep his job.
Don't spend $500 when you can spend $200. Small consolation, but.....
VV*off topic* VV
I must say that although I prefer dodges over fords, my last boss did have a small amount of work done to his 06 f-350 powerstroke. (intake, exhaust, edge chip etc.. but it looked stock).. and daayyyummmnn that was fast.. 100% honestly the fastest thing I've ever ridden in. including corvettes/chargers/mustangs anything of that nature. it would easily blow the doors off of any of those by at least half the 0-60 mph time... until his tranny blew up because he would tow around mini-ex trackhoes with his chip turned up.
GOAT
Back from the beyond
- Location
- Roanoke, VA
GOAT
Back from the beyond
- Location
- Roanoke, VA
bobmed
- - - -
- Location
- sugarliberty
The nanny state is what pisses me off.
The government thinks they have to control everything.
We are not intelligent enough to take care of ourselves.
Of course for some, that is true
The government thinks they have to control everything.
We are not intelligent enough to take care of ourselves.
Of course for some, that is true
thanks carl
I am looking for pocket style now. Any suggestions?
If you like the pocket style, then nope--they're overpriced and brittle, but AFAIK Bushwacker is the only option for them.
If you don't want pocket style, then stock-style (but 7" wide) flares are under 2 bills.
GOAT
Back from the beyond
- Location
- Roanoke, VA
- Location
- Sandy, Ut
Illegal by 10mm
Actually 12.7mm
The first number in a metric indicates its width not height.
GOAT
Back from the beyond
- Location
- Roanoke, VA
Actually 12.7mm
The first number in a metric indicates its width not height.
I know how to read metrics. You are right about the 12.7 on 205mm vs 215mm wide though. I was being lazy:busted:
Tacoma
Et incurventur ante non
- Location
- far enough away
10, 12.5, whatever it takes
Rickomatic
Grey is cool!
- Location
- West Jordan
Funny thing is, I've had more broken windshields in the 3.5 years I've lived in Utah than anywhere else. Impacts always seem to be in the drivers view BTW.
Never once was it from an 4x4 vehicle. Most have tires with voids too large to actually trap a rock. A majority are from people crossing lanes at high speed in construction areas (I-80E for me) and throwing stuff up in the air. The rest are from 18 wheelers that have crap falling/flying off of them or light duty construction trailers loaded with a dirty backhoe ETC.
Then there are the ones that you have no idea where the heck it came from
I don't hate the UHP since that is truly pointless. The legislators are the source of these laws that drive us nuts. The LEOs are just there to enforce them. When the enforcement becomes inconsistent, people get frustrated.
Even tough some of these laws are completely ridiculous, it sounds like it was much worse at one time. Some grassroots efforts improved the situation quite a bit. Well done.
Does the thought of shelling out $500.00 for god-ugly flares and putting mudflaps on Jenn's jeep still make me want to puke blood?
Yes.
Here is a good example of that very thing:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090226/ap_on_fe_st/odd_good_samaritan_ticketed